*****************************************************************
03/17/05 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 13.61
*****************************************************************
   RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject
line and first line of body

                         NUCLEAR POLICY
 
1 Guardian Unlimited: Envoys Aim to Restart N. Korea Nuke Talks
2 Guardian Unlimited U.S. Envoy, Others Meet on N. Korea Nukes
3 Xinhua: Russia stands for nuclear free Korean peninsula   
4 US: USATODAY.com - Secrecy: It can work against you
5 Guardian Unlimited: Israeli Whistleblower Vanunu Indicted
6 Bellona: Russian nuclear industry lost proper state environmental ex
7 BBC: Vanunu charged for media contacts
8 UCLA International Institute :: Nuclear hotspots
9 IAEA: "New Reality" Shaping Nuclear Security's Global Directions
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
10 [NYTr] USA's $5 Billion Nuke Power Gamble with China
11 US: NRC: Progress Energy Carolinas, Incorporated; Notice of Issuance
12 US: NRC: Notice of Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding 
13 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Seeking the truth
14 US: JS Online: PSC reconsiders nuclear power plant sale 
15 CPA: N.B. premier says Ottawa has role to play in future of nuclear 
16 Globe and Mail: Lord wants federal help with nuclear power plant
17 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Meeting Notice
18 Xinhua: Nation develops nuclear power   
19 US: NRC: Subcommittee Meeting on Planning and Procedures; Notice of 
20 US: NRC: Carolina Power & Light Company; Brunswick Steam Electric Pl
21 US: NRC: Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Pow
22 Sofia Morning News: EP Delegation to Inspect Bulgaria's Nuke
23 US: NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for th
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
24 US: Hawk Eye: Explosion causes IAAP fire 
25 US: Hawk Eye: Weapons workers still wait 
26 US: KVOA: High beryllium levels found in Sunnyside School District
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
27 US: Urgent: No nuke waste on Native lands! Please help by signing
28 Documents for Nuclear Waste Project May Have Been Falsified,
29 www.GovExec.com - USGS employee may have falsified Yucca Mountain do
30 deseret news: Was Yucca data falsified? 
31 Nevada Appeal: Nevada leaders react to the Yucca Mountain admission
32 Las Vegas SUN: Government: Nuke Waste Papers May Be False
33 KRWB: Scientists suspected of falsifying documents on nuclear waste 
34 Daily Breeze: New claims undermine Utah nuclear waste dump project
35 ENS: Falsified Yucca Mtn. Documents Bolster Nuclear Dump's Critics
36 Daily Yomiuri: Atomic energy panel OK's U.K. proposal for waste exch
37 chillicothe gazette: Waverly firm takes over plant - 
38 US: NC Times: Catastrophe awaits in Utah 
39 Las Vegas RJ: YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Suspicion over data surfaces 
40 Yucca: PORTER TROUBLED BY LATEST YUCCA NEWS - Will hold hearing
41 Bellona: Sellafield status update: Pile 1 decommissioning plans movi
42 Las Vegas SUN: U.S. Geological Survey has history of problems at Yuc
43 Las Vegas SUN: Panel reiterates chances slim of volcano affecting Yu
44 Las Vegas SUN: Yucca data allegedly falsified
45 Platts: USGS employees say Yucca Mt. project procedures were violate
46 RGJ: Yucca papers falsified, DOE says
47 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Wait on N-waste plan, panel is asked 
48 Salt Lake Tribune: Alleged lies may kill Yucca 
49 Yucca: Gibbons Statement on Alleged Falsification of Yucca Documents
50 US: San Antonio Current: Radioactive waste, trash talk, and facts on
51 ENSIGN: YUCCA SCIENCE ALLEGATIONS VINDICATE NEVADA'S CASE: 
52 Reid: Reid Statement on Falsification of Yucca Mountain Documentatio
53 US: AU ABC: Uranium inquiry to assess export prospects. 
54 Yucca: Governor Guinn Expresses Outrage
55 klastv.com: Nevada Leaders Call For The Attorney General to Interven
56 KVBC: DOE Admits Yucca Mt. Safety Information May Have Been Lied Abo
57 KVBC: Yucca Mountain Proposal Documents Now Said To Be Falsified
58 Whitehaven News: DON'T DUMP WASTE HERE 
 
                         NUCLEAR WEAPONS
 
59 Interfax: Moscow knows nothing of Washington's plans to revise NPT
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
60 ABQjournal: UC Eyes Partners In Bid For Lab 
61 Tri-City Herald: Energy Northwest mum on evaluation 
62 Daily Californian: Regents Reaffirm Support For Lab - 
63 lamonitor.com: Regents briefed on LANL contract 
64 lamonitor.com: Nanos to testify 
65 lamonitor.com: Emergency Management Office stresses education 
 
                          OTHER NUCLEAR
 
66 Las Vegas RJ: Base opens new center for remote-piloted craft 
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 Guardian Unlimited: Envoys Aim to Restart N. Korea Nuke Talks
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday March 17, 2005 1:31 PM

AP Photo SHA101 

By CHRISTOPHER BODEEN 

Associated Press Writer 

SHANGHAI, China (AP) - Envoys from the United States, China, 
Japan and South Korea discussed Thursday how to restart formal 
talks on ending North Korea's nuclear weapons program, officials 
said, but there was no indication that a Pyongyang representative 
attended. 

U.S. envoy Joseph DeTrani and Chinese Foreign Ministry officials 
were among those attending the meetings, officials said. Scholars 
and experts on the region also were there. 

``We believe this meeting will nurture new opinions and 
approaches for promoting the resumption of the six-party talks,'' 
said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao, at a 
briefing in Beijing. 

Those talks have been stalled by North Korea's refusal to attend. 
Since 2003, Beijing has hosted three rounds of talks with the 
United States, Japan, the two Koreas and Russia to discuss ways 
to dismantle the North's nuclear weapons program. Pyongyang 
canceled a planned fourth round in September. 

North Korea has demanded more aid and a peace treaty with 
Washington in exchange for abandoning nuclear arms development. 

China, as North Korea's last major ally, has been trying to bring 
the reclusive country back to negotiations. The effort has taken 
on greater urgency since Pyongyang's unconfirmed declaration in 
February that it has nuclear weapons. 

``At present, the six-party talks have stalled and encountered 
some problems,'' Liu said. ``We hope the various sides will work 
vigorously and demonstrate flexibility in order to reopen the 
six-party talks.'' 

The issue is expected to be a key topic when Secretary of State 
Condoleezza Rice visits Beijing on Sunday and Monday. 

The U.S. Consulate in Shanghai described Thursday's discussions 
as a series of workshops aimed at ``moving forward with the 
six-party talks,'' but it said DeTrani would not be delivering 
prepared remarks. 

DeTrani has helped lead efforts to convince North Korea to return 
to talks. U.S officials met at least twice with North Korean 
officials in New York in December to tell them the United States 
was ready to resume nuclear negotiations and wanted to resolve 
the issue diplomatically. 

Liu would not say which Chinese officials were at the conference, 
describing it as a ``non-governmental meeting'' with participants 
attending ``in their own private capacity.'' 

Security guards prevented journalists from approaching 
participants. 

The North Korean nuclear crisis began in late 2002 when U.S. 
officials said Pyongyang told them it had revived a program to 
acquire nuclear weapons. Last year, North Korea pulled out of the 
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.     
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited Š Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
 
*****************************************************************
 2 Guardian Unlimited U.S. Envoy, Others Meet on N. Korea Nukes
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 
 	 
Thursday March 17, 2005 11:31 PM

By CHRISTOPHER BODEEN 

Associated Press Writer 

SHANGHAI, China (AP) - Envoys from the United States, China,
Japan and South Korea discussed Thursday how to restart formal
talks on ending North Korea's nuclear weapons program, officials
said, but there was no indication that a Pyongyang
representative attended. 

A North Korean official visiting South Africa blamed the United
States for a breakdown in the talks and reiterated the
government's anger at being branded an outpost of tyranny. 

Yang Hyong Sop, vice president of North Korea's parliament, said
it was now up to the United States to create ``appropriate
conditions'' for dialogue, the South African Press Association
reported. ``Figuratively speaking, the ball is in the U.S.'
court,'' he was quoted as saying after talks Thursday with South
Africa's Deputy President Jacob Zuma. 

In Shanghai, U.S. envoy Joseph DeTrani and Chinese Foreign
Ministry officials were among those attending the meetings,
officials said. Scholars and experts on the region also were
there. 

``We believe this meeting will nurture new opinions and
approaches for promoting the resumption of the six-party
talks,'' said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao,
at a briefing in Beijing. 

Those talks have been stalled by North Korea's refusal to
attend. Since 2003, Beijing has hosted three rounds of talks
with the United States, Japan, the two Koreas and Russia to
discuss ways to dismantle the North's nuclear weapons program.
Pyongyang canceled a planned fourth round in September. 

North Korea has demanded more aid and a peace treaty with
Washington in exchange for abandoning nuclear arms development. 

China, as North Korea's last major ally, has been trying to
bring the reclusive country back to negotiations. The effort has
taken on greater urgency since Pyongyang's unconfirmed
declaration in February that it has nuclear weapons. 

``At present, the six-party talks have stalled and encountered
some problems,'' Liu said. ``We hope the various sides will work
vigorously and demonstrate flexibility in order to reopen the
six-party talks.'' 

The issue is expected to be a key topic when Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice visits Beijing on Sunday and Monday. 

The U.S. Consulate in Shanghai described Thursday's discussions
as a series of workshops aimed at ``moving forward with the
six-party talks,'' but it said DeTrani would not be delivering
prepared remarks. 

DeTrani has helped lead efforts to convince North Korea to
return to talks. U.S officials met at least twice with North
Korean officials in New York in December to tell them the United
States was ready to resume nuclear negotiations and wanted to
resolve the issue diplomatically. 

Liu would not say which Chinese officials were at the
conference, describing it as a ``non-governmental meeting'' with
participants attending ``in their own private capacity.'' 

Security guards prevented journalists from approaching
participants. 

The North Korean nuclear crisis began in late 2002 when U.S.
officials said Pyongyang told them it had revived a program to
acquire nuclear weapons. Last year, North Korea pulled out of
the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. 	 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited Š Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
 3 Xinhua: Russia stands for nuclear free Korean peninsula   

  www.xinhuanet.com

  www.chinaview.cn 2005-03-18 04:04:41   

    MOSCOW, March 17 (Xinhuanet) -- Russia stands for keeping
the Korean peninsula free of nuclear weapons through a flexible
approach, the Itar-Tass news agency reported Thursday, quoting
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Alexeyev. 

    Moscow thinks the six-party negotiations should be aimed at
"taking steps towards freeing the Korean peninsula of nuclear
weapons through flexible approaches and diplomatic compromises,"
Alexeyev said Thursday at the embassy of the Democratic People's
Republic of Korea (DPRK) in Moscow. 

    "We are in favor of resuming the six-party negotiations (on
theKorean peninsula's nuclear problem) as soon as possible and
finding solutions that would correspond with the interests of
all sides in the negotiation process," he noted. 

    Russia believes that if the concerns and fears of all the
regional states that are taking part in the negotiation process
are truly taken into account, "it would create the conditions
necessary for restarting the six-sided peace process and
initiating the nuclear disarmament of the region," Alexeyev
said. 

    Commenting on Moscow-Pyongyang relations, Alexeyev noted
that Moscow welcomed growth in the two countries' trade and
especiallythe development of trade between bordering regions. 

    He also said that Moscow still keeps the position on the
development of relations between South Korea and the DPRK and
willsupport it in the future. 

    Alexeyev reaffirmed Moscow continues to oppose "any kind of
actions that would weaken stability and harm the development of
good neighborly relations in the region." Enditem 

  Copyright Š2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 4 USATODAY.com - Secrecy: It can work against you
 
  Posted 3/16/2005 10:01 PM   

By Paul McMasters 

It has the whiff of a stand-up routine. A high government 
official calls a news conference to announce an important new 
development. But he can't tell you exactly what it is, who is 
involved or how to find out more about it. 

This sort of thing actually happens. As it did in February of 
2002, when then-Transportation Security Administration (TSA) 
director John Magaw called the national press together to address 
the flying public's growing unrest about new security measures 
instituted after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. 

Director Magaw proudly announced that the TSA had appointed an
ombudsman to provide a "simple but very complete
passenger-complaint system." Unfortunately, the director said he
could not divulge the name of the new ombudsman or contact
information because it had been declared "security sensitive
information." 

We are inclined to dismiss such incidents as bureaucratic burps
from Washington, a government stranger than comedy. Instead,
they're part of a significant shift in this nation's information
policy. Since 9/11, restrictions on disclosure of even routine
government information, such as the telephone directory at the
Pentagon, have spread at an alarming rate. 

'Hiding danger' 

Some secrecy is urgently needed, of course, to protect national
security. But increasingly, excessive secrecy is endangering
security by hiding danger. 

" In Eunice, N.M., residents were denied information about the
health and safety impact of plans to build a uranium enrichment
plant in their community. 

" In Wyoming and Montana, local officials were frustrated in
efforts to obtain government data about reports of serious
problems with nearby dams. 

" In California, consumer groups have tried in vain to void
secrecy agreements between federal and state officials about the
recall of contaminated or diseased meat. 

Such restrictions on access to government information  some
having nothing to do with the threat of terrorism  have
expanded sharply in the past few years. 

The federal government is now stamping documents "secret" at a
record-breaking pace of 14 million a year, four times that of a
decade ago, according to the federal Information Security
Oversight Office. The president has increased the number of
entities that have the power to classify information. The
Justice Department has turned on its head the presumption of
openness in the Freedom of Information Act. Agencies have
reduced protections for whistle-blowers within the government. 

And in the past two years, a broad new secrecy regime of
"sensitive but classified" material has emerged, putting massive
amounts of information out of reach. Rep. Henry Waxman,
D-Calif., calls this new system "pseudo-classification" and has
called for a study to determine its effect on open government. 

Government officials are in a bad place in all this. None of
them wants to disclose information that would help terrorists.
Caution is understandable and necessary. 

That caution, however, is allied with a long-held reluctance on
the part of federal officials to share information with
Congress, the public, scholars and the press  or among
themselves. That reluctance has little or nothing to do with
security and more to do with maintaining power, retaining
political advantage or hiding mistakes and missteps. 

Americans nevertheless need maximum access to government
information in order to engage in effective public discourse, to
hold government officials accountable and to participate as full
partners in their own governance. 

When the public's right to know is disputed, however, the
government's right to control information is assumed. 

Under current restrictions on access, local officials are left
to wonder about the dangers that threaten their homes and
families. They are the ones resting uneasily next door to
chemical and nuclear plants, watching warily as hazardous
materials speed by in trucks and trains, speculating nervously
about unguarded or deteriorating pipelines, bridges and dams. 

But in order to gain access to vital information, local and
state officials now must enter into a secrecy compact with
federal officials that carries harsh fines and prison sentences
if they intentionally or accidentally divulge that information.

That presents a formidable barrier to prioritizing efforts and
expenditures, preparing for the worst or generating public
pressure for hardening targets against attack or accidents. 

The 9/11 Commission's report revealed how the
compartmentalization of information contributed to our failure
to anticipate the terrorist attacks. In 2001, the rise of global
terrorism was not a major issue for Americans, and we were left
exposed. When risks are unknown or unpublicized, the public is
not energized, and political leaders are not moved to act. 

So, unexamined secrecy before the 9/11 calamity was a problem.
Now, it is offered as a solution. 

Our default setting 

There is no way to measure or monitor the extent to which
secrecy affects government operations today. There is no clear
constitutional, political or regulatory rationale for it.
Congress and the courts have not proved a real check on it. Yet
it has become the default setting on government information
policy. 

Ironically, unnecessary secrecy can be a threat to the secrets
we need to protect. 

In an annual report to the president, J. William Leonard,
director of the Information Security Oversight Office, wrote:

"Much the same way the indiscriminate use of antibiotics reduces
their effectiveness in combating infections, classifying either
too much information or for too long can reduce the
effectiveness of the classification system, which, more than
anything else, is dependent on the confidence of the people
touched by it." 

That confidence can suffer greatly when secrecy itself is among
the multiplying threats Americans face these days. 

Paul McMasters is the First Amendment ombudsman at the Freedom
Forum's First Amendment Center and a former deputy editor of USA
TODAY's editorial page. Secrecy: It can work against
you3/16/2005 10:01 PMBy Paul McMasters-->   


  Š Copyright 2005 USA TODAY, a division of   

*****************************************************************
 5 Guardian Unlimited: Israeli Whistleblower Vanunu Indicted

From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

	Thursday March 17, 2005 2:16 PM

JERUSALEM (AP) - Israeli nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu
was indicted Thursday for violating the terms of his release
from prison, the Israeli Justice Ministry said. 

Vanunu was freed from an Israeli prison in April after
completing an 18-year sentence for revealing secrets of Israel's
atomic program to the Sunday Times newspaper in London. 

Under the terms of his release, the former technician at the
Israeli nuclear facility in the Negev desert town of Dimona was
barred from leaving Israeli territory and contacting foreigners.
Since his release from prison, Vanunu has been living at a
Jerusalem church compound.	 
		 	 	   



                    
                    



        
        

      Guardian Unlimited Š Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
 
*****************************************************************
 6 Bellona: Russian nuclear industry lost proper state environmental expertise 

Environmental activists believe it is needed to establish a
strong state body independent from any industry to conduct
environmental expertise, otherwise Russias natural resources
will be wiped out. 

2005-03-17 18:50

The last year administrative reform in Russia ignored the
environmental problems again, while the Russian nuclear industry
received more power. The Federal Agency on Environmental,
Technological and Nuclear Control, which is subordinated to the
Prime Minister Fradkov, received several important functions,
including environmental expertise of the industrial sites. It is
no reason to believe that the Russian State Environmental
expertise follows the Russian and international environmental
requirements, the Ecodefense group believes. It is just enough
to read the biography of the acting director of the Federal
Agency on Environmental, Technological and Nuclear Control,
former deputy chief of the Russian Nuclear Ministry, Andrey
Malyshev. 

This is a complete absurd. A supervising body should control
the activity of the industry and federal agencies, but not
conduct state expertise of the industry projects. Uniting these
two functions gives a perfect opportunity for corruption. We are
appealing to the government to establish an agency, independent
from any official interests, for conducting state environmental
expertise, or else the Russias natural resources will be soon
wiped out said co-chairman of the Ecodefense group Vladimir
Slivyak. According to Slivyak, Malyshev protects the nuclear
interests and has issued operating licenses for Chernobyl-type
reactors, which exceeded their lifetime. Besides, Malyshev is
known for creation structures inside the nuclear industry, which
help to steel the budget money, he added. 

In the end of 2003, the chairman of the security committee in
the Russian State Duma Victor Ilukhin applied to the FSB (former
KGB) with the parliamentary request regarding Malyshevs alleged
participation in the corruption inside the nuclear industry. The
summary of the request about Andrey Malyshevs activity and
corruption in the Russian State Nuclear Regulatory, or GAN, and
Rosenergoatom you can read on Antiatom.ru (in Russian). 
  
  Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge
Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact:
webmaster@bellona.no
Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62  * P.O.Box
2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway
*****************************************************************
 7 BBC: Vanunu charged for media contacts
 
Last Updated: Thursday, 17 March, 2005
 
[Mordechai Vanunu on release from prison]                               
Vanunu has tested the authorities since his release                                                            

An Israeli court has charged Mordechai Vanunu with
violating the terms of his release from jail last year. 

The charges relate to the former nuclear technician's interviews
with foreign media and defying a travel ban. 

But he told Reuters news agency he would continue speaking to
the press, despite the charges. 

Mordechai Vanunu served 18 years in jail for disclosing details
of Israel's nuclear programme, and was released in April under
strict conditions. 

He has not been arrested and Israeli officials say they are not
aware of any plans to take him into custody. 

The Christian convert was briefly held over Christmas after
attempting to go to the West Bank town of Bethlehem. 

They can charge me 50 times they want. I will continue speaking 
to the press Mordechai Vanunu        

Israel insists Vanunu still poses a security threat and he is
banned from leaving Israel - including visiting the West Bank
and Gaza Strip - or talking to foreigners without permission. 

But he has given several interviews to foreign media, including
the BBC. 

He denies passing on classified information about the Dimona
nuclear plant where he used to work. 

Now living in Jerusalem's St George's Anglican cathedral, Vanunu
is banned from using the internet or mobile phones, and may not
approach embassies or borders. 

Defiance 

Israel's justice ministry charged Vanunu with 21 counts of
violating the restrictions, some of which are due to expire next
month. 

"They can charge me 50 times if they want," he told Reuters. 

"The police are just following procedure," he said. 

I am still hopeful they wi end my restrictions Mordechai Vanunu        

"I have not been charged with harming national security but with
not respecting the restrictions on me," Reuters quoted him as
saying. 

"I am still hopeful they will end my restrictions." 

In May 2004 - a month after his release - he gave his first
interview to the BBC, through an Israeli journalist. 

He said he had spoken out to prevent a nuclear holocaust. 

Vanunu was kidnapped in Italy by Israeli agents in 1986
following a Sunday Times article, based on an interview with
him, which exposed Israel's atomic secrets. 		 	 		 	 



*****************************************************************
 8 UCLA International Institute :: Nuclear hotspots
 	 	 	 	 
UCLA Chancellor Albert Carnesale Speaks On Nuclear Proliferation
at UIRS Meeting 

Chancellor Albert Carnesale spoke to a capacity crowd of members
of the Undergraduate International Relations Society (UIRS) on
March 9th in Ackerman 2408. The meeting was arranged by the
executive board of UIRS with the help of Dean and Vice Provost
Geoffrey Garrett, who is also Director of the Burkle Center for
International Relations that sponsors UIRS. The Chancellor spoke
about the past, present and future of nuclear proliferation,
with particular emphasis on the challenges posed by Iran and
North Korea, and then engaged in a roundtable discussion with
the club. He is an internationally regarded expert on
international security issues, having served as a consultant to
government agencies and represented the United States in the
SALT 1 talks with the Soviet Union. 

UIRS has hosted events for members with prominent speakers in
the winter quarter, including not only Chancellor Carnesale and
Dean Garrett but also former Democratic presidential candidate,
Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis who is currently Visiting
Professor in the UCLA School of Public Affairs. 

Chancellor Carnesale began by claiming that "nuclear
proliferation is the single greatest threat we face". However,
he also noted that the number of nuclear states has only
increased by one to two in the past thirty years. The Chancellor
went on to identify some of the problems facing nuclear
containment today. He reviewed the challenges brought about by
the collapse of the Soviet Union, the creation of "loose nukes"
in Russia, and the nuclear expertise that some 3000 ex-Soviet
scientists hold. 

The Chancellor devoted the bulk of his remarks to the two
countries of greatest concern to the United States today: North
Korea and Iran. The greatest threat of North Korea as a nuclear
state is that it is an extremely poor country that will sell
anything to anyone, he said. Another problem cited by the
Chancellor is the cascade effect; if North Korea has nuclear
weapons, the surrounding countries may see a new-found desire or
need for them as well. Assessing the actual threat that North
Korea poses is hard because they have what Chancellor Carnesale
called a "very secretive, very closed" society. 

Chancellor Carnesale then went on to explain the options for
dealing with the North Korean threat. They are currently engaged
in six-party talks but the government is demanding one-on-one
talks with the United States. Chancellor Carnesale stated that
all of this maneuvering is the result of paranoia on the part of
the North Koreans, who fear a South Korean and/or American
attack. As a dictatorship, the government uses this fear to keep
the country in line, and the people really believe it, he said.
Looking forward, diplomacy is the the least bad option," said
the Chancellor, "and I believe that they can be bought." 

Like North Korea, Chancellor Carnesale did not see any direct
threat to the United States coming from Iran. In fact, a
preemptive Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities is a
greater threat. He does not believe that the Israelis will allow
Iran to get close to having usable nuclear weapons. 

The threat to the United States of missile-based delivery
systems in other countries was downplayed by the Chancellor
because the complexity of the technology makes it infeasible for
terrorists and rogue nations. Therefore, even if missile defense
systems were an exact science, they would not be very useful in
today's world. When asked about port security and homeland
defense, Carnesale stressed the alternate delivery systems that
could be used, all which require stronger security. He concluded
in saying that along with the need for diplomacy comes the need
for a greater and different intelligence capacity than during
the Cold War.

"We need to revamp for the post-Cold War period," he concluded.
The chancellor generously stayed over the allotted time in order
to answer all of the questions that the students posed.

UIRS will continue to host numerous speakers and sponsor a
variety of events on campus this spring in order to spread
awareness to undergraduates about international issues and offer
them access to experts in the faculty, administration, and field.

If you are interested in speaking to undergraduates Spring
quarter, please contact us at uirs@ucla.edu.  If you are
interested in becoming a new member, please send an email to
lbirch06@ucla.edu.

Undergraduate International Relations Society
Date Posted: 3/17/2005 			 		 		 		 		
Recent News Stories

  + Nuclear hotspots 
UCLA Chancellor Albert Carnesale Speaks On Nuclear Proliferation
at UIRS Meeting 
  + American Ideals, Not Foreign Policy, Thrive in Middle East
"America is betraying the values it taught us!" This phrase,
uttered by one of my Arab friends from the American University
of Beirut, echoed my feelings as I traveled around the Middle
East visiting five classmates on the 50th anniversary of our
meeting as students at AUB. 
  + Electoral Democracy Has Yet to Shake Mexico's Corrupt
Bureaucracy
Alejandro Gertz Manero, Vicente Fox's former National Secretary
of Security, points to the dramatic rise in drug use and crime
in his country as proof that the reforms have gone only half
way.                                              

UCLA International Institute " 11343 Bunche Hall " Box 951487 "
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1487
Campus Mail Code: 148703 " Tel: (310) 825-4921 " Fax: (310)
825-4591 " info@international.ucla.edu 

Š 2005. The Regents of the University of California. All rights
reserved. 
*****************************************************************
 9 IAEA: "New Reality" Shaping Nuclear Security's Global Directions
 
+ [IAEA.ORG :: Atoms for Peace] 
 
Staff Report
 16 March 2005 [IAEA, WCO and Interpol Radiation Counter
Training Course ] 

Customs and police investigators from Eastern Europe are shown
how to use a radiation counter during an IAEA, WCO and Interpol
training course to combat nuclear trafficking. (Photo credit: V.
Mouchkin/IAEA) 

  + Nuclear Terrorism: Identifying and Combating the Risks, IAEA
Director General 
  + 
  + Nuclear Trafficking Statistics Factsheet,
 1993-2004 [pdf] 
  + IAEA & Nuclear Security 
  + 
  + Powerful Radioactive Source Secured 
  + IAEA Nuclear Security Factsheet 

The threat of nuclear terrorism has not diminished, but a "new
reality" is shaping nuclear security´s global directions, IAEA
Director General Mohamed ElBaradei told experts attending an
international security conference that opened in London today. 

Much progress has been made through international cooperation
over the past three years to combat the risks of nuclear
terrorism, Dr. ElBaradei said. "Vulnerabilities still exist," he
said, in urging countries to focus on setting "priorities for
moving forward" against them. He noted that stronger global
cooperation is leading to more effective and credible approaches
to nuclear security - "not only for detecting and responding to
illicit trafficking, but also for the protection of nuclear
power plants, research reactors, accelerators, and the array of
nuclear and other radioactive materials that support these and
other nuclear applications." 

Since March 2003 the IAEA has been working with countries
worldwide to strengthen the security of nuclear and radiological
materials. One effort is helping governments to recover stolen,
lost and vulnerable radioactive sources. They include disused
sealed sources from Bolivia, Cote d´Ivoire, Haiti, Iran,
Malaysia, Panama, Sudan and Thailand, which the Agency helped to
safely condition or ship back to the original suppliers. 

"For those of us in the nuclear field, it has become obvious
that our work to strengthen nuclear security is both vital and
urgent - and that we must not wait for a ´watershed´ nuclear
security event to provide the needed security upgrades," the
Director General said. 

As part of its strategy to prevent, detect and respond to
nuclear terrorism, the IAEA is assisting countries to train
customs officials, install better detection equipment at border
crossings, and review programmes through some 125 security
advisory and evaluation missions sent to nuclear facilities
worldwide. The IAEA´s security activities are largely funded
through the IAEA´s Nuclear Security Fund, which has received
over $35 million from 26 countries and organisations since
September 2001. 

Dr. ElBaradei noted that some countries still lacked the
programmes and resources to respond properly to the threat of
nuclear and radiological terrorism. "For these countries,
international cooperation is essential to help them strengthen
their national capacities." 

The IAEA illicit trafficking database shows over 650 confirmed
incidents of trafficking in nuclear or other radioactive
material since 1993. Last year, nearly 100 such incidents
occurred, 11 of which involved nuclear material. As part of
measures to strengthen global nuclear security, the IAEA will
look to establish comprehensive nuclear security guidelines and
recommendations, and to assist States with their implementation. 

The IAEA´s International Conference on Nuclear Security: Global
Directions for the Future runs from 16 - 18 March 2005. It is
hosted by the Government of the United Kingdom and organized in
cooperation with the European Commission (EC), the European
Police Office (Europol), the International Criminal Police
Organization (ICPO-Interpol), the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), and the World Customs Organization
(WCO). 

The first day will review the achievements and shortcomings of
international efforts to strengthen nuclear security; day two
will explore how the international nuclear security regime is
adapting to new measures - and the IAEA role in underpinning
them; the focus of the final day is on additional steps that can
be taken internationally to forge a common "security culture"
against global threats of nuclear terrorism. 

Press Contact: 

Peter Rickwood
 Public Information Officer
 Media and Outreach Section
 Div. of Public Information
 [43] 699-165-22047(mobile)
 Copyright 2003-2004, International Atomic Energy Agency, P.O.
Box 100, Wagramer Strasse 5, A-1400 Vienna, Austria 
Telephone (+431) 2600-0; Facsimilie (+431) 2600-7; E-mail: 
*****************************************************************
 10 [NYTr] USA's $5 Billion Nuke Power Gamble with China
 
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 08:20:10 -0600 (CST)

 
Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 

[Here we have the USA, which opposes nuclear technology for Iran and North
Korea, and which is bickering with the EU over arms sales to China,
underwriting a $5 billion nuclear power program for energy-hungry China.
More get-rich-quick schemes for US business, and the consequences be damned.
It's hard to understand why the pundits call the Bush regime highly
"ideological" -- their real policy seems to be simply looting the world,
from corporations at home to profiteering abroad, raping the environment
and trashing world economic stability in the process. There's not an iota
of ideology in sight -- it's all just grabbing the quick buck.-NY Transfer]

Asia Times Online - Mar 11, 2005
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/GC11Ad05.html

US's $5 billion nuclear gamble with China

By Kaushik Kapisthalam

On the surface, it's the biggest deal in the history of the
Export-Import Bank of the United States - US$5 billion to finance the
building of Chinese nuclear power plants by US firms in the
energy-starved economic giant. But there's much more to it than big
business: closer scrutiny and interviews with experts reveal a weak,
inconsistent and ultimately dangerous US policy with regard to China
and its past (some say present) weapons proliferation, as well as
China's own efforts to acquire nuclear reactors and other Western high
technology that could be passed on to less-than-responsible states.

In effect, in the interests of big business, the US is turning a blind
eye to past proliferation by Chinese entities with which it deals.
China says it's clean - no more proliferation and unauthorized exports
of nuclear materials and equipment to states that should not have
them. Not everyone is so sure.

America's sometimes serious, sometimes blase non-proliferation policy
with respect to China hit a new low when the conservative magazine
Human Events revealed that the US Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im Bank), an
independent federal agency that finances exports by US firms, approved
a preliminary commitment for $5 billion in loans and loan guarantees
to the China National Nuclear Corp (CNNC) to finance the building of
nuclear power plants by US firms.

The Ex-Im loans and guarantees are part of aggressive efforts by US
officials and diplomats, including former energy secretary Spencer
Abraham and current Vice President Dick Cheney, to lobby the Chinese
government to sign a deal with Monroeville, Pennsylvania-based power
giant Westinghouse Electric Co. Westinghouse had previously lobbied
hard to obtain clearance for the sale from the US Nuclear Regulatory
Commission last September.

Facing skyrocketing demand and significant electricity shortfalls, as
well as numerous constraints based on the Kyoto Accord to reduce
coal-burning emissions, China has emphasized the importance of new
energy projects and declared a plan to invite bids for four more
nuclear plants at two sites, Sanmen in Zhejiang province and Ling Ao
in Guangdong province, adding to its nine operating reactors with a
combined capacity of 6,500 megawatts, which is less than 2% of China's
electricity demand today. In addition, Russian firms are building two
1,000MW pressurized water reactors (PWRs, known as VVERs in Russia) in
Tianwan, on China's east coast. Chinese officials foresee the need for
as many as 32 nuclear power plants by 2020 at an estimated cost of
more than $35 billion.

Westinghouse, though considered a front-runner for the new PWR tender,
is reportedly facing stiff competition from French major Framatome
ANP, Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd (AECL) and the Russian firm
AtomStroyExport. Such reactors are usually contracted in pairs and
Westinghouse is pitching its state-of-the-art AP1,000 PWRs at $2.2
billion to $2.7 billion a pair. China formally accepted bids on
February 28 and should it choose Westinghouse, the American taxpayer
would be underwriting the reactor sale through Ex-Im and assuming the
risk in case the Chinese buyer defaults.

At face value, this would seem to be just another example of US
statecraft used to promote US companies abroad. After all,
Westinghouse is unlikely to get too many new contracts to build
nuclear power plants in the United States, due to the public
ambivalence about and opposition to nuclear energy, and getting deals
abroad could result in thousands of new US jobs.

What makes this deal different is the entity at the Chinese end -
CNNC. Along with its wholly owned subsidiary, China Nuclear Energy
Industry Corp (CNEIC), CNNC is known for numerous nuclear
proliferation activities over many years.

Despite this, US sanctions policy for punishing proliferation is weak
and contradictory. It does not sanction company B if company A is
caught proliferating, even if companies B and A are owned by the same
entity. That is why there is a perversely ironic situation in the
Ex-Im Bank's funding of CNNC, when officially the US blames the CNEIC
for proliferation - even though CNEIC is owned by CNNC.

The real story is more than the mammoth business transaction - it's
the proliferation links of the Ex-Im's beneficiary (CNNC) and the
series of broken promises and sanctions shell game Beijing has been
able to play with Washington.

The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and other multilateral regimes have
one basic premise - if a country sticks to the treaty guidelines
concerning non-weaponization, it can partake in the peaceful use of
nuclear technology. That's the reward for non-proliferation. For a
country like Iran, the NPT commitments are to foreswear permanently
the development of nuclear weapons. For China, which is one of the
five allowed nuclear-weapons states (along with the United Kingdom,
France, Russia and the United States), the bargain means forswearing
the spreading of nuclear-weapons technology.

For decades, China had been seeking to gain access to advanced Western
nuclear energy technology but was denied the chance by the Nuclear
Suppliers Group (NSG) and other cartels precisely because of Beijing's
perceived poor nuclear-weapons proliferation record, especially with
regard to Iran and Pakistan. For its part, China initially was openly
hostile to such cartels and the need for export controls and restraint
in sales to troublesome countries. As a result, China was denied
access to advanced reactors despite its nuclear-weapons-state status
in the NPT.

In the 1990s, however, China had a change of heart. Chinese leaders
agreed to formulate Western-style export-control laws to prevent
unauthorized weapons-technology sales in return for a US promise of
gradual entry of China into these cartels with their promise of access
to technology. From the US perspective, this was a case of dangling
NSG and other memberships as carrots to induce China to end
proliferation, and the US backed China's membership in the Nuclear
Suppliers Group.

Some well-placed sources, however, say they believe China probably has
made promises not to proliferate, in order to gain entry into the
cartels, while trying to evade some of its non-proliferation
commitments. China denies this. The fundamental idea is that China is
rewarded with Western reactor technology as long as it makes a
commitment not to proliferate nuclear weapons technology or authorize
any nuclear sale to facilities not under safeguards of the United
Nations International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). It has made that
commitment, though some doubt Beijing's sincerity.

In February 1996, the Washington Times, quoting intelligence sources,
reported that the US had evidence that CNNC sold 5,000 ring magnets to
the A Q Khan Research Laboratory in Pakistan, named after the putative
"father" of Pakistan's nuclear bomb who was pardoned in February 2004
after confessing to nuclear-weapons deals with Iran, Libya and North
Korea. Ring magnets are critical parts of high-speed centrifuges used
to enrich uranium to weapons grade. After equivocating for a while,
the US State Department officially confirmed the report. Chinese vice
foreign minister Li Zhaoxing (now foreign minister) did not deny the
sale but argued that it was "peaceful nuclear cooperation". Many
experts, however, called the sale a clear breach of Article III (2) of
the NPT. Since China had formally become a signatory to the NPT by
that time, non-proliferation advocates and US lawmakers called for
stringent sanctions on China.

However, it soon became clear that tough sanctions were never in the
cards. A broad-based sanctions regime would have resulted in the
cancellation or blocking of massive deals involving US corporate
giants such as Boeing Aircraft Co and Westinghouse (which had pending
deals with CNNC at that time). There was intense debate within the
administration of US president Bill Clinton. After a few more months
of waffling, the State Department finally announced on May 10, 1996,
that the US had been unable to "make a determination" that China
violated the NPT with this ring-magnet deal. As a result, the Clinton
administration declared that it would not seek to impose sanctions on
China or Pakistan, and Ex-Im's considerations of loans for US
exporters to China were returned to normal.

Ring magnets are old news but the entities that authorized the sale
are still powerful. Chinese leaders insisted they were not aware of
the magnet transfer and stated that there is no evidence that the
Chinese government had "willfully aided or abetted" Pakistan's
nuclear-weapons program through the ring-magnet sale. They also touted
an apparent "concession" by China when a Chinese Foreign Ministry
spokesman made a statement that "China will not provide assistance to
unsafeguarded nuclear facilities".

The US Congress passed a law closing the apparent loophole of
requiring proof of willful government involvement and also requiring a
presidential report on China's transfers of "technology, equipment, or
materials important to the production of nuclear weapons and their
means of delivery" to Pakistan.

What is new is the expected financing of a Chinese entity, CNNC, owner
of CNEIC, which is known to have passed nuclear technology on to
states that should not possess it.

China did not wait too long to violate its May 1996 pledge. In October
1996, the Washington Times quoted a report by the US Central
Intelligence Agency stating that China sold a "special industrial
furnace" and "high-tech diagnostic equipment" to unsafeguarded nuclear
facilities in Pakistan. In addition, Chinese technicians in Pakistan
reportedly prepared to install the dual-use equipment in September
1996. The firm involved in the deal was the CNEIC. The Washington Post
reported that the CNEIC equipment was intended for a nuclear reactor
being built by Pakistan at Khushab. The Khushab facility is not under
IAEA safeguards, thereby making the Chinese sale a clear violation of
May 1996 pledge, US laws and possibly the NPT. It later became known
that the Khushab facility was the site of a heavy-water research
reactor - a central element of Pakistan's program for production of
plutonium and tritium for advanced compact nuclear warheads meant for
ballistic missiles.

Still, the State Department did not conclude that China had violated
its non-proliferation pledges of 1996 in the case of Pakistan and did
not call for sanctions.

The Khushab reactor now provides Pakistan the ability to produce
enough plutonium to fabricate as many as three to five bombs every
year. CNNC and CNEIC have also been implicated in nuclear
weapons-related sales to Iran since then. Not long after the Khushab
revelation, Ex-Im approved two loans to help CNNC build nuclear power
plants at the Qinshan nuclear facility near Shanghai. US major Bechtel
was the primary beneficiary of that deal.

To the defenders of US nuclear trade with China, the potential
Westinghouse deal is just a natural step in the Chinese re-engagement
with the multilateral nuclear regimes led by Western nations. Some
would point to their view that China has moved greatly along the path
of non-proliferation, from a policy of open contempt and hostility in
the 1970s and 1980s to accession to various treaties and informal
agreements in the 1990s and the current decade. The State Department
extols what it sees as great advances in China's export-control laws,
which are now deemed comparable to Western standards. In fact, the
State Department lobbied hard for China's 2004 entry into the NSG, a
cartel of nuclear-reactor technology producers. The NSG entry directly
led to China being able to buy advanced nuclear reactors from Western
nations.

Another popular theory is that many such proliferation deals are not
approved by the Chinese government and can be stopped by working with
the Chinese government to improve and enforce its export-control laws.
China's recent issuing of a White Paper on non-proliferation is cited
as progress in this regard. But this theory too fails to stand up to
scrutiny. Other than the simple fact that Chinese firms are
state-controlled and common sense dictates that major sales cannot
happen without approval at the highest levels, there is a
preponderance of evidence that there is government approval for
proliferation activities.

The US-China Economic and Security Review Commission notes in its 2004
report that Chinese firms involved in proliferation have links to high
government and Communist Party officials. Former US secretary of state
James A Baker made similar observations in his memoirs - he should
know because he was involved in discussions with the Chinese regarding
their pattern of broken pledges with regard to nuclear and missile
proliferation.

It therefore seems clear that the engagement advocates have based
their China policy more on how they hope China will behave than how
China actually behaves. It is quite clear that China has joined
multilateral regimes to gain prestige and derive benefits like access
to advanced nuclear technology, while violating its sovereign
commitments and hiding behind plausible deniability. It can be argued
that China thwarts challenges to its behavior, knowing that its
commercial strength can be used to stymie any moves to punish its
proliferation activities.

For its part, the US government, through the outgoing Under Secretary
of State John Bolton and others, has argued that Washington has taken
tough action on Chinese entities engaging in proliferation, through
the imposition of sanctions and other moves. But as non-proliferation
expert Gary Milhollin wrote in the New York Times recently, these
sanctions are part of a "shell game" wherein the US knows its effects
don't sting the Chinese regime as much as it appears.

For instance, after discovering that certain subsidiaries of Sinopec,
China's state-owned oil and natural-gas conglomerate, was transferring
chemical-weapons-related technology to Iran, the State Department
repeatedly slapped sanctions on the subsidiaries. But loopholes in the
US laws allow the punishment of individual entities within a
corporation while shielding others. In this case, the Sinopec
subsidiaries that were sanctioned did little or no business with US
firms and the sanctions therefore were meaningless.

Had the US really wanted to send a message to China, it should have
hit the parent entity, Sinopec, argued Milhollin. He said further that
in 2000, Sinopec raised about $3.5 billion by selling shares on the
New York Stock Exchange, with ExxonMobil buying a large stake. In
addition, the US firm Halliburton has since provided Sinopec a design
for a new chemical plant; Bechtel has helped it build a petrochemical
complex in China; and oil giant ConocoPhillips has aided it in oil and
gas exploration. In 2002, Sinopec actually received a grant worth
$429,000 from the US Trade and Development Agency. Clearly, by
employing the logic of the left hand not knowing what the right hand
does, US policy in effect winks at blatant Chinese proliferation and
indeed seeks to reward violators with huge deals.

At the end of the day, America's current pusillanimous policy on
Chinese proliferation has left it in a veritable no-man's land. By in
effect placing trade over security, the US is playing into China's
hands. For instance, once the US stymied internal objections and
pushed through China's entry into the Nuclear Suppliers Group, it
handed China a big club and China wasted no time in using it. Until
its entry into the NSG, China listened politely to US demands that it
needed to provide iron-clad guarantees that any foreign-origin
nuclear-reactor technology would not be transferred, before China
would be allowed to procure reactors from NSG cartel members.

But as the journal Nuclear Fuel reported in 2004, even before the ink
dried on China's NSG entry papers, China blatantly told the US that it
"sees no basis'' for committing itself to a deal to buy a US power
reactor should the US impose any additional requirements for
re-transfer assurances simply because the French and Canadians were
offering the same technology to China sans any meddlesome
preconditions, thanks to its newly minted NSG-member status. As a
consequence, the US and other nuclear powers are now tripping over
themselves to offer nuclear reactors to China with generous financial
and other incentives.

It must be noted that just before China joined the NSG, it hurriedly
signed a deal with Pakistan for building a 300MW unsafeguarded nuclear
reactor at Chasma, near Karachi. Such a deal would be a violation had
China signed it after its NSG membership became formal. Is it hard to
imagine the state-of-the-art Framatome or Westinghouse PWR nuclear
technology soon being sold by China to Pakistan or Iran? And should it
happen, is it likely that the US would suddenly get the will to lower
the boom on Chinese proliferators? US acquiescence to China's
proliferation also undercuts Washington's policy on problem states
such as Iran and North Korea. How can the US expect to send a tough
message to China on nuclear/missile trade with Iran when it ends up
financing the parent firms of the same entities that proliferate?

If the US is really concerned about nuclear proliferation, it should
take muscular steps to confront China's proliferation, rather than
offering rewards in big business deals to build nuclear reactors.

[Kaushik Kapisthalam is a freelance defense and strategic affairs
analyst based in the United States.

Copyright 2005 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved.
       
                                *
Search the NYTr Archives at:
http://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/

To subscribe or unsubscribe or change your settings via the web, visit:
http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr

=================================================================
  NY Transfer News Collective   *   A Service of Blythe Systems
           Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us
              339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012
  http://www.blythe.org                  e-mail: nyt@blythe.org
================================================================= 
*****************************************************************
 11 NRC: Progress Energy Carolinas, Incorporated; Notice of Issuance of
 
                         FR Doc 05-5279 
[Federal Register: March 17, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 51)] 
[Notices] [Page 13053-13055] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr17mr05-90]                         
 
an Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 
for License Renewal of the H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, 
Unit 2 Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation AGENCY: 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
ACTION: Environmental assessment.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher M. Regan, Senior 
Project Manager, Mail Stop O 13D13, Spent Fuel Project Office, 
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Telephone: (301) 
415-1179; fax number: (301) 415-1179; e-mail: cmr1@nrc.gov.
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
(NRC or the Commission) is considering renewing Carolina Power 
and Light Company (CP) now doing business as Progress Energy 
Carolinas, Inc. (PEC's) (the applicant's) License No. SNM-2502 
under the requirements of title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations, part 72 (10 CFR part 72) authorizing the continued 
operation of the H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2 
(HBRSEP) Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) 
located at the HBRSEP in Darlington County, South Carolina. The 
Commission's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards has 
completed its review of the environmental report submitted by the 
applicant on February 27, 2004, in support of its application for 
a renewed materials license. The staff's ``Environmental 
Assessment related to the renewal of the H.B. Robinson 
Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation'' has been issued in 
accordance with 10 CFR part 51.
 
I. Summary of Environmental Assessment (EA) Description of the 
Proposed Action: The proposed licensing action would authorize 
the applicant to continue operating a dry storage ISFSI at the 
HBRSEP site. The purpose of the ISFSI is to allow for interim 
spent fuel storage and, indirectly, power generation capability, 
beyond the term of the current ISFSI license to meet future power 
generation needs. The current license will expire August 31, 
2006. The renewed ISFSI license would permit 40 additional years 
of storage beyond the current license period. The current ISFSI 
employs the NUHOMS[supreg] system for horizontal, dry storage of 
irradiated fuel assemblies in concrete modules licensed for use 
at the HBRSEP ISFSI.
 
Currently, the facility is licensed to store 56 spent fuel 
assemblies contained in 8 steel dry shielded canisters, 7 fuel 
assemblies to a canister, housed in 8 horizontal storage modules.
 
Need for the Proposed Action: The HBRSEP ISFSI is needed to 
provide continued spent fuel storage capacity so that the HBRSEP 
can continue to generate electricity. This renewal is needed to 
provide an option that allows for interim spent fuel storage and, 
indirectly, power generation capability, beyond the term of the 
current ISFSI license to meet future system generating needs. The 
renewed ISFSI license would permit 40 additional years of storage 
beyond the current license
 
[[Page 13054]] period and transfer to a Federal repository for 
permanent disposal of the waste. An exemption would allow an 
additional 20 years of storage beyond the renewal period for a 
total of 40 years beyond the original licensed period.
 
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action: The NRC staff has 
concluded that the license renewal of the HBRSEP ISFSI will not 
result in a significant impact to the environment. The prior NRC 
Environmental Assessment associated with the issuance of 
Materials License SNM-2502 continues to form the basis for 
assessing the potential environmental impacts of the proposed 
license renewal action. The environmental impacts associated with 
the proposed action concentrate on only those impacts projected 
to occur during the requested 40 year license renewal time 
period. Environmental impacts include the potential direct 
effects on the ambient environment and its resources. These 
potential impacts can be categorized as non-radiological and 
radiological impacts.
 
There will be no significant radiological or non-radiological 
environmental impacts from routine operation of the HBRSEP ISFSI 
during the extended period of operation. The ISFSI is essentially 
a passive facility with no liquid and gaseous effluents released 
from the ISFSI that exceed Federal regulatory limits. The 
continued operation of the HBRSEP ISFSI will result in no change 
to the current impact on land use, water resources, air quality, 
generation of wastewater, geology, biota, cultural resources, and 
area demographics and socio-economics. The HBRSEP ISFSI is in its 
completed configuration and as such there will be no 
environmental impacts from construction activities.
 
The staff does not expect operation of the HBRSEP ISFSI for an 
additional period of 40 years to impact any threatened or 
endangered species. The radiological dose rates from the ISFSI 
will be limited by the design of the horizontal storage module. 
The total occupational dose to workers at the HBRSEP site 
resulting from continued ISFSI operation will have a small impact 
on workers or the public, but all occupational doses must be 
maintained below the limits specified in 10 CFR part 20. The 
annual dose to the nearest resident from HBRSEP ISFSI activities 
remains significantly below the annual dose limits specified in 
10 CFR 72.104 and 10 CFR 20.1301. The cumulative dose to an 
individual offsite from all site activities will be less than the 
limits specified in 10 CFR 72.104 and 10 CFR 20.1301. These doses 
are also a small fraction of the doses resulting from 
naturally-occurring terrestrial and cosmic radiation of about 300 
mrem/yr in the vicinity of the HBRSEP ISFSI. Additionally, 
occupational doses received by facility workers will not exceed 
the limits specified in 10 CFR 20.1201. For hypothetical 
accidents, the calculated dose to an individual at the nearest 
site boundary is well below the 5 rem limit for accidents set 
forth in 10 CFR 72.106(b) and in the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency's protective action guidelines.
 
Radiological decommissioning of the ISFSI would be complete when 
the last dry shielded canister is removed from the site. Small 
occupational exposures to workers could occur during 
decontamination activities, but these exposures would be much 
less than those associated with cask loading and transfer 
operations. Due to the containment design of the sealed surface 
storage casks, no residual contamination is expected to be left 
behind on the horizontal storage module and concrete base pad. 
The horizontal storage modules, base pad, fence, and peripheral 
utility structures are defacto decommissioned when the last cask 
is removed.
 
Alternatives to the Proposed Action: The applicant's 
Environmental Report and the staff's EA discuss several 
alternatives to the proposed ISFSI license renewal. These 
alternatives include shipment of spent fuel to a permanent 
Federal Repository, ship the spent fuel off-site, construct a new 
spent fuel storage pool at the site, and construct another 
on-site ISFSI, as well as the no action alternative. In the first 
category, the alternatives of shipping spent fuel from HBRSEP to 
a permanent Federal Repository or to another spent fuel storage 
facility were determined to be non-viable alternatives, as no 
such facilities are currently licensed in the United States, and 
shipping the spent fuel to other power stations is not common 
practice because the receiving utility would have to be licensed 
to store the HBRSEP spent fuel, and it is unlikely that another 
utility would be willing to accept it, in light of their own 
limitations on spent fuel storage capacity. Other alternatives 
include the construction of additional on- site storage 
capabilities. These options were considered less favorable 
because of the increased costs involved and the additional worker 
exposures from transfer of the spent fuel.
 
Renewal of the HBRSEP ISFSI license for a term of 20 years would 
result in the ISFSI license expiring 4 years prior to expiration 
of the proposed HBRSEP operating license. Based on the expected 
limits on the amounts of fuel that can be shipped annually to a 
potential Federal Repository and the anticipated opening of such 
a facility, PEC estimates it would not be able to ship all the 
spent fuel before expiration of the HBRSEP ISFSI license. As a 
result, a third renewal of the HBRSEP ISFSI license would be 
required, thereby adding cost.
 
The no action alternative could result in the expiration of the 
HBRSEP ISFSI license. The fuel currently stored would then have 
to be removed. Storage capacity limitations would require PEC to 
ship fuel to an available offsite storage facility. Transfer of 
fuel from the existing HBRSEP ISFSI to another facility would 
increase worker exposure. Following removal of the fuel the 
HBRSEP ISFSI would be decommissioned. Since the HBRSEP ISFSI 
would eventually be decommissioned, the impacts of the ``no 
action'' alternative are considered similar to the other 
alternatives.
 
As discussed in the EA, the Commission has concluded that there 
are no significant environmental impacts associated with renewing 
the license of the HBRSEP ISFSI, and other alternatives were not 
pursued because of significantly higher costs, additional 
occupational exposures, and the unavailability of offsite storage 
options.
 
Agencies and Persons Contacted: Officials from the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, the South Carolina State Historic Preservation 
Office, and the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources 
were contacted in preparing the staff's environmental assessment. 
The conclusions by all agencies consulted were consistent with 
the staff's conclusions.
 
II. Finding of No Significant Impact The staff has reviewed the 
environmental impacts of renewing the HBRSEP ISFSI license 
relative to the requirements set forth in 10 CFR part 51, and has 
prepared an Environmental Assessment. Based on the Environmental 
Assessment, the staff concludes that there are no significant 
radiological or non-radiological impacts associated with the 
proposed action and that issuance of renewal of the license for 
the interim storage of spent nuclear fuel at the HBRSEP ISFSI 
will have no significant impact on the quality of the human 
environment.
 
Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.31 and 51.32, a finding of no 
significant impact is appropriate and an environmental impact 
statement need not be prepared for the renewal of the materials 
license for the HBRSEP ISFSI.
 
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of NRC's ``Rules of Practice,'' 
final NRC
 
[[Page 13055]] records and documents regarding this proposed 
action, including the application for license renewal dated 
February 27, 2004, and supporting documentation, and the staff's 
EA, dated March 2005, are publically available in the records 
component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management 
System (ADAMS). These documents may be inspected at NRC's Public 
Electronic Reading Room at 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html under Accession No. 
ML040690774 and ML050700137. These documents may also be viewed 
electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's 
Public Document Room (PDR), O1F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction 
contractor will copy documents for a fee. Persons who do not have 
access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the 
documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference 
staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or (301) 415-4737, or by 
e-mail to

 
pdr@nrc.gov. Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of 
March, 2005.
 
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Christopher M. Regan, 
Senior Project Manager, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of 
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
 
[FR Doc. 05-5279 Filed 3-16-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 12 NRC: Notice of Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No 
 
                         FR Doc 05-5280 
[Federal Register: March 17, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 51)] 
[Notices] [Page 13052-13053] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr17mr05-89]                         
 
Significant Impact Regarding a Proposed Exemption; Portland 
General Electric Company; Trojan Independent Spent Fuel Storage 
Installation AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
ACTION: Issuance of environmental assessment and finding of no 
significant impact.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher M. Regan, Senior 
Project Manager, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Telephone: (301) 415-8500; fax 
number: (301) 415-8555; e-mail: cmr1@nrc.gov.
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background Portland General 
Electric Company (PGE) is the licensee and holder of License No. 
SNM-2509 for the Trojan Independent Spent Fuel Storage 
Installation (Trojan ISFSI). In addition, PGE holds License No. 
NPF-1, pursuant to 10 CFR part 50, for the Trojan Nuclear Plant 
(TNP).
 
The licensee will complete decommissioning of the Trojan Nuclear 
Plant and intends to terminate its part 50 license for the Trojan 
Nuclear Plant. The Trojan ISFSI contains the spent fuel removed 
from the Trojan Nuclear Plant.
 
Currently, the licensee provides financial assurance for the 
Trojan ISFSI pursuant to 10 CFR 72.30(c)(5), which allows a part 
50 license holder to use the financial assurance provisions of 
part 50 to provide financial assurance for an ISFSI. The licensee 
maintains an external sinking fund for decommissioning funds 
pursuant to 10 CFR 50.75(e). However, when its part 50 license is 
terminated, it will no longer meet the condition of 10 CFR 
72.30(c)(5) that allows it to use its existing external sinking 
fund to provide financial assurance for its ISFSI.
 
On April 29, 2004, PGE filed a request for NRC approval of a 
partial exemption from the provision of 10 CFR 72.30(c)(5) that 
requires an ISFSI licensee to additionally hold a part 50 license 
in order to use an external sinking fund as the exclusive means 
of financial assurance for decommissioning costs of an ISFSI.
 
II. Environmental Assessment Identification of Proposed Action: 
Pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 72.7, PGE requested a 
partial exemption from the financial assurance requirements of 10 
CFR 72.30(c)(5). The exemption request was ``partial'' because it 
would apply only to the requirement that the ISFSI licensee also 
hold a part 50 license to use an external sinking fund as its 
exclusive method of providing financial assurance for its ISFSI. 
The licensee will continue to provide financial assurance 
conforming to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.75(e) and (h), 
although it reserved the right to change to another method as 
provided in other sections of 10 CFR 72.30(c). The licensee 
pointed out that the wording of 10 CFR 72.30(c)(5) allowed an 
``electric utility'' to use an external sinking fund as the 
exclusive method of providing financial assurance when its part 
72 ISFSI license was first issued.
 
However, the rule was amended effective on December 24, 2003, 
which resulted in the change of the condition from ``electric 
utility'' to ``a Part 50 licensee.'' PGE stated that it will 
remain an electric utility after the termination of its part 50 
license, hence it will continue to meet the intent of the rule as 
originally issued.
 
The proposed action before the Commission is whether to grant 
this exemption pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7. Need for the Proposed 
Action: The applicant is undertaking decommissioning activities 
associated with the Trojan Nuclear Plant and has informed the NRC 
of its intent to terminate the TNP operating license (License No. 
NPF-1), issued pursuant to 10 CFR part 50. PGE's 2003 Annual 
Financial Statement (Form 10-K, submitted to the U.S. Securities 
and Exchange Commission (SEC) on March 19, 2004) stated that PGE 
will collect $14 million annually, until 2011, from its customers 
to pay for decommissioning. Those collections will occur whether 
or not the exemption is granted. However, if the exemption is not 
granted, PGE will incur higher costs due to the expense of 
providing a second independent financial assurance instrument, 
which would lead to unnecessary additional costs. Therefore, the 
exemption is in the public interest. If PGE were to adhere to the 
financial assurance requirements of 10 CFR 72.30, without the 
granting of the partial exemption, an unnecessary financial 
burden and associated increased overall operating costs would be 
borne by the applicant. In addition, granting of the partial 
exemption to the requirements of 10 CFR 72.30(c)(5) will 
facilitate
 
[[Page 13053]] completion of the decommissioning of the TNP site 
and eventual termination of the 10 CFR part 50 license.
 
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action: In 1999 the NRC 
issued a license to PGE to construct and operate the Trojan 
ISFSI. Prior to this action the NRC examined the environmental 
impacts of constructing, operating, and decommissioning of the 
Trojan ISFSI and determined that such impacts would be acceptably 
small. The staff's conclusions were documented in an 
environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact and 
published in the Federal Register (61 FR 64378) on December 4, 
1996. On the basis that the proposed exemption deals with 
financial matters that will not affect the physical design or 
operation of the Trojan ISFSI, the staff finds that the proposed 
exemption will not have any significant environmental impact.
 
Alternative to the Proposed Action: As an alternative to the 
proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed 
action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). Approval or denial 
of the exemption request would result in no change in the 
environmental impacts described in the staff's final EA. 
Therefore, the environmental impacts of the proposed action and 
the alternative action are similar.
 
Agencies and Persons Consulted: On March 3, 2005, Mr. Adam Bless 
of the Oregon Office of Energy, Energy Resources Division, was 
contacted regarding the environmental assessment for the proposed 
exemption and had no concerns. The NRC staff previously evaluated 
the environmental impacts of the Trojan ISFSI in the 
environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact 
published in the Federal Register (61 FR 64378) on December 4, 
1996, and has determined that additional consultation under 
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act is not required for this 
specific exemption which involves financial assurance mechanisms 
and will not affect listed species or critical habitat. The NRC 
staff has similarly determined that the proposed exemption is not 
a type of activity having the potential to cause effects on 
historic properties. Therefore, no further consultation is 
required under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation 
Act.
 
III. Finding of No Significant Impact The environmental impacts 
of the proposed action have been reviewed in accordance with the 
requirements set forth in 10 CFR part 51.
 
Based upon the foregoing EA, the Commission finds that the 
proposed action of granting the partial exemption from 10 CFR 
72.30(c)(5) that requires an ISFSI licensee to additionally hold 
a part 50 license in order to use an external sinking fund as the 
exclusive means of financial assurance for decommissioning costs 
of an ISFSI, will not significantly impact the quality of the 
human environment. Accordingly, the Commission has determined 
that a Finding of No Significant Impact is appropriate, and that 
an environmental impact statement for the proposed exemption is 
not necessary.
 
Supporting documentation, with respect to this exemption request, 
is available for inspection at NRC's Public Electronic Reading 
Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ADAMS.html. A copy of the 
PGE request for NRC approval of a partial exemption from the 
provision of 10 CFR 72.30(c)(5), dated April 29, 2004, can be 
found at this site using the Agencywide Documents Access and 
Management System (ADAMS) accession number ML041260470. Any 
questions should be referred to Christopher M. Regan, Spent Fuel 
Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555, Mailstop 
O 13D13, telephone (301) 415-8500, fax (301) 415-8555.
 
Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of March, 2005.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Christopher M. Regan, Senior Project Manager, Spent Fuel Project 
Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
 
[FR Doc. 05-5280 Filed 3-16-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 13 Brattleboro Reformer: Seeking the truth

March 17, 2005 Brattleboro, VT                                                                                 
			 					 						 						 			
Nuclear engineer sees both sides

By CAROLYN LORIÉ 
Reformer Staff

BRATTLEBORO -- Nuclear engineer Howard Shaffer wants to know the 
truth -- more than just the rigid facts of science or the 
unassailable solution of a mathematics equation; more than the 
emotional claims of protest rhetoric or the blanket accusations 
of extremists.

 Shaffer was one of the first engineers to work on Vermont Yankee 
in the early 1970s. Today, as opponents and proponents of nuclear 
power wrangle over the plant's future, Shaffer navigates the 
polarized political landscape in search of what's right.

 And he's not afraid to stand with both sides.

 The early days

 When Shaffer first entered the world of nuclear energy the 
question of whether it was the right thing for the military, for 
the United States and for humanity didn't loom large.

 It was 1962. Shaffer was 21 years old with a degree in 
electrical engineering from Duke University. He was young, smart 
and ambitious. 

Less than a decade earlier, President Dwight D. Eisenhower 
launched the Atoms for Peace Program, which sought international 
cooperation in developing nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. 
In the now famous speech before the General Assembly of the 
United Nations, Eisenhower proposed that the horror of atomic 
weapons should be left behind while the promise of nuclear energy 
universally pursued.

 "Who can doubt, if the entire body of the world's scientists and 
engineers had adequate amounts of fissionable material with which 
to test and develop their ideas, that this capability would 
rapidly be transformed into universal, efficient, and economic 
usage," asked the president on Dec. 8, 1953.

 Shaffer wanted to be a part of that transformation.

 "I loved it. It appealed to my engineering senses," he says, 
looking back. "It was contemporary. It was modern and sexy. It 
was the computer of its day."

 As a freshman at Duke, Shaffer joined the Naval Reserve Officer 
Training Corps. Not only did it satisfy his military obligation 
-- the draft was in effect -- but the Navy was at the forefront 
of nuclear research and development.

 Though there were submarines in World War II, they ran on 
batteries or fossil fuels and had to surface at least every 18 
hours. After the war, the United States Navy designed and built 
the first nuclear submarine -- the Nautilus -- which made its 
maiden voyage in 1955. It went from New London, Conn., to San 
Juan, Puerto Rico, in 84 hours -- without surfacing.

 Under the command of Admiral Hyman Rickover, the Navy 
aggressively pursued nuclear power as a means of propulsion and 
in the process became the premier training ground for nuclear 
engineers.

 The day Shaffer graduated from college, he was commissioned as 
an officer in the Navy. From North Carolina, he went to Vallejo, 
Calif., where he attended Navy Nuclear Power School for six 
months.

 This was followed by 13 months in Idaho Falls at the National 
Reactor Testing Station and more than two years in New England, 
attached to the submarine Seawolf.

 Shaffer married in 1964. Four years later he and his wife 
Mariann and their two boys Peter and David moved to Norfolk, Va. 
For the next two years, Shaffer worked at the local naval base, 
completing his final two years in the service.

 By the time his Navy career ended in 1970, Shaffer was an 
experienced nuclear engineer ready to enter civilian life and put 
Eisenhower's vision into practice.

 He was hired by Ebasco Services to work on a new power plant 
under construction in Vernon.

 Shaffer arrived in the Northeast eager to apply his technical 
skill for the good of Vermonters, only to discover that not 
everyone shared his enthusiasm for this new source of power.

 Much had changed between the president's speech in 1953 and the 
turbulent days of the 1970s.

 The opposition

 Shaffer began working on the Vermont Yankee project on April 1, 
1970. Just a few weeks later, the first Earth Day was celebrated 
and just weeks after that four students at Kent State University 
in Ohio were killed during a protest against the Vietnam War.

 The nation's political and social climate was charged, as 
opposing ideologies clashed on all fronts -- including nuclear 
power.

 Vermont was no different, as residents and the newly formed New 
England Coalition fought to keep the Vernon plant from starting 
up. There were intervenors in the licensing process and Shaffer 
recalls his reaction: "I was aghast. Why don't people think this 
is great?"

 Shaffer was frustrated as the licensing process was bogged down 
by hearings. His confidence in nuclear power was unshaken by the 
activists and he found their ideas easy to dismiss.

 Vermont Yankee's first day of commercial operation was Nov. 30, 
1972. By then Shaffer had completed his work at Vermont Yankee 
and was in Michigan working on a different plant.

 In 1974, Shaffer completed a master's degree in nuclear 
engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

 By then the country had suffered its first oil shortage and the 
government's eagerness to invest in nuclear power rose sharply.

 But also on the rise was the environmental movement and within 
it, the voices of opposition to nuclear power were growing 
louder.

 Only now Shaffer was listening.

 The truth

 Initially, the listening was to gather information about the 
"other side." But at some point it shifted and what the other 
side was saying began to interest Shaffer. He began rechecking 
the science of nuclear power.

 "I never had doubts about it, but I had questions," he explains. 
"I wanted to find out for myself if I was involved in the right 
thing. I wanted to find out the truth."

 And what he found out was this: He believed the science was 
sound and the technology safe. He also believed that the 
opposition was doing more than wasting time.

 "Gradually I came to understand that they were raising some 
legitimate issues," says Shaffer. "In those days, the environment 
was a sewer."

 While he maintains that members of the public are often 
ill-informed when talking about the science of nuclear power, 
Shaffer does not consider this to be grounds for dismissing their 
concerns.

 "Even though we're talking about all these technical things, 
we're really talking about something else. It's about the 
environment and people's right to know and to not be afraid. And 
that's where the government and industry have failed," say 
Shaffer.

 Although he is now retired, Shaffer continues to work as a 
consultant and does public outreach and education on nuclear 
power.

 Many people in the community have come to appreciate his 
approach to dealing with the issue. The town of Brattleboro 
invited him to give a "Nuclear 101" workshop to the Selectboard 
and Town Manager Jerry Remillard says he found the engineer to be 
less concerned about proselytizing and more concerned about being 
informative.

 Even Shaffer's ideological opponents respect his style, 
including Peter Alexander, executive director of the New England 
Coalition.

 "Howard is a gentleman of the old school. He's honorable and 
kind and believes in what he's doing," says Alexander. "I just 
wish he were on our side."

 But after more than four decades in the industry, Shaffer 
remains committed to the field that caught his attention as a 
21-year-old. He has no regrets about throwing his hat into the 
ring of what was once a new and exciting science.

 Nor does he regret his willingness to listen to those opposed to 
it.

       Copyright Š1999-2005 New England Newspapers, Inc., a 
member of MediaNews Group, Inc. - - 
*****************************************************************
 14 JS Online: PSC reconsiders nuclear power plant sale 

WISCONSIN: JS ONLINE    

Utility's request for rate increase expected to pass
 By THOMAS CONTENT

tcontent@journalsentinel.com Posted: March 16, 2005 

Wisconsin energy regulators may change course today and endorse
the $220 million sale of the Kewaunee nuclear plant to a
Virginia energy company. 


  [51201] Wisconsin's Nuclear Power   
  Possible Plant Sale   
  
Construction:Some want to lift barriers to new nuclear projects 
  
The state Public Service Commission hasn't given any indication
of how members will vote, but opponents of the sale expressed
disappointment when the commission reopened the case earlier
this year. The commission did not accept opponents' request for
oral arguments in the case, agency spokeswoman Linda Barth said. 

Also today, the commission is expected to grant an interim price
increase for Milwaukee-based We Energies, to offset the
utility's higher natural gas and purchased power costs. The
company has asked for an increase of $115 million, which would
translate to an increase of 4.8% or $3.34 a month for the
typical residential electric customer. 

The commission rejected the Kewaunee sale by a 2-1 vote in
November but opened the door to approving the deal in January,
after changes proposed by Dominion Resources Inc., the company
seeking to buy the plant. 

Last month, Dominion executives expressed optimism that the sale
would be approved and that the transaction would be completed by
mid-year. If approved, the sale is projected to add $15 million
to Dominion's 2005 earnings, the company said. 

Wisconsin Public Service Corp. of Green Bay and Wisconsin Power
&Light Co. of Madison say they want to sell the plant to relieve
themselves of the risks of running an aging nuclear reactor at a
time when ownership of reactors around the country is being
consolidated by a handful of companies, including Dominion. 

The companies say the sale would provide rate certainty for
customers, through a power-purchase agreement negotiated between
the Wisconsin utilities and Dominion. But opponents say they are
worried about the potential for rate shock once that agreement
expires in 2013. 

"Customers will bear additional costs when plants like Kewaunee
are deregulated and down the road start selling their power to
the wholesale market at whatever rate they can achieve," said
John Sumi, executive director of Customers First, a coalition of
utility customer groups, the Municipal Electric Utilities of
Wisconsin and Madison Gas &Electric. 

Dominion says it has changed the proposed sale agreement to
reflect reservations two commissioners had about the plan when
they rejected it in November. Among the changes: an increased
financial commitment from Dominion, a pledge to return unneeded
decommissioning funds to Wisconsin customers, and the
negotiation of a document that Dominion says would bind future
owners of the plant to the terms. 

Lawyers for the customer groups say those assurances aren't
enforceable and could be subject to legal challenge. 

Meanwhile, Nuclear Management Co. - the company that runs the
plant for Wisconsin Public Service - will meet with staff of the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission today to discuss a problem that
occurred during the plant's refueling shutdown last fall. 

During the shutdown, an equipment hatch at the reactor could not
be closed because of tracks installed to remove and replace the
reactor's vessel head. While moving a piece of equipment, the
plant was required to close the hatch but couldn't do so until
the tracks were modified. 

The hatch must be closed in case something falls and damages the
reactor, said commission spokesman Jan Strasma. 

The decision on Kewaunee will take place while the plant is shut
for two months to repair a problem in a backup cooling system. 
   From the March 17, 2005, editions of the Milwaukee Journal
      
*****************************************************************
 15 CPA: N.B. premier says Ottawa has role to play in future of nuclear plant

canadaeast.com - 

CP Atlantic Regional News
 
CHRIS MORRIS
 	 	 	 	 	 	 
FREDERICTON (CP) - Premier Bernard Lord says the federal 
government has a role to play in deciding the future of Atlantic 
Canada's only nuclear power plant.

 Lord said Wednesday that if Ottawa wants to support Canada's 
nuclear industry, it has a responsibility to help finance the 
proposed refurbishment of the Point Lepreau plant near Saint 
John, N.B.

 "I don't think it's the responsibility of the ratepayers of New 
Brunswick or the government of New Brunswick to prop up and 
support the nuclear industry of Canada," Lord said.

 Lord's Conservative government and NB Power, the provincial 
Crown utility, have to decide whether to rehabilitate the aging 
Candu reactor at Lepreau, at a cost of $1.4 billion, or spend 
about $500 million to mothball the facility.

 Bruce Power, a private company that operates a major nuclear 
facility in Ontario, has made an offer to take over Lepreau, but 
the Lord government is looking for at least $400 million from the 
federal government to make the project viable.

 "If there's a good business case, we will proceed with Lepreau," 
the premier told reporters.

 It's estimated the refurbishment would give the 22-year-old 
reactor another 25 years of life.

 Lord said that if it is too costly to fix up Lepreau, the 
province will have to look at other options, such as construction 
of a coal-fired generating station.

 The premier was hoping Ottawa would seize the opportunity to 
keep Lepreau operating to help meet targets for greenhouse gas 
reductions under the Kyoto accord.

 But federal officials have downplayed the likelihood of Kyoto 
emission credits for Lepreau.

 "I do not know what programs they will look at, but all I can 
tell you is that it does not reduce emissions by refurbishing a 
plant," Federal Natural Resources Minister John Efford said last 
week.

 Still, Lord said discussions are underway between the province 
and Ottawa to see if there are revenue sources for Lepreau.

 "Lepreau was the first Candu reactor of its kind, therefore I 
think the federal government and Atomic Energy of Canada have a 
stake in this refurbishment," he said.

 "That's why we . . . will continue our discussions with the 
federal government to see what is their response."

 A decision on Lepreau was expected last year.

 Repeated delays have put the Lord government under growing 
pressure to make a decision.

 Bruce Power says it wants a decision as soon as possible.

 Lord said he is waiting for NB Power to complete its analysis of 
the Lepreau refurbishment. He said the government can't make a 
decision until it gets a recommendation from NB Power.

 Lord said the utility's board of directors is meeting this week 
to deal with Lepreau.

on canadaeast.com Copyright Š 2005 Brunswick News Inc. All rights 
*****************************************************************
 16 Globe and Mail: Lord wants federal help with nuclear power plant
 	
GLOBEANDMAIL.COM

Thursday, March 17, 2005 Page A13		 	 		 		

Fredericton -- New Brunswick Premier Bernard Lord says the
federal government has a role to play in deciding the future of
Atlantic Canada's only nuclear power plant.

Mr. Lord said yesterday that if Ottawa wants to support Canada's
nuclear industry, it has a responsibility to help finance the
proposed refurbishment of the Point Lepreau plant near Saint
John. 

Mr. Lord's Conservative government and NB Power, the provincial
Crown utility, have to decide whether to rehabilitate the aging
Candu reactor at a cost of $1.4-billion, or spend about
$500-million to mothball it. CP 

  + Š Copyright 2005 Bell Globemedia Publishing Inc. All Rights
Reserved. 	 	 	
Globeandmail.com:
*****************************************************************
 17 NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Meeting Notice
 
                         FR Doc 05-5274 
[Federal Register: March 17, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 51)] 
[Notices] [Page 13055-13056] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr17mr05-91]                         
 
In accordance with the purposes of Sections 29 and 182b. of the 
Atomic Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2039, 2232b), the Advisory Committee 
on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) will hold a meeting on April 7-9, 
2005, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The date of this 
meeting was previously published in the Federal Register on 
Wednesday, November 24, 2004 (69 FR 68412).
 
Thursday, April 7, 2005, Conference Room T-2B3, Two White Flint 
North, Rockville, Maryland 8:30 a.m.-8:35 a.m.: Opening Remarks 
by the ACRS Chairman (Open)--The ACRS Chairman will make opening 
remarks regarding the conduct of the meeting.
 
8:35 a.m.-10 a.m.: Final Review of the License Renewal 
Application for Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 
(Open)--The Committee will hear presentations by and hold 
discussions with representatives of the Southern Nuclear 
Operating Company and the NRC staff regarding the license renewal 
application for Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 and 
the associated final Safety Evaluation Report prepared by the NRC 
staff.
 
10:15 a.m.-11:15 a.m.: NUREG-1792, ``Good Practices for 
Implementing Human Reliability Analysis'' (Open)--The Committee 
will hear presentations by and hold discussions with 
representatives of the NRC staff regarding NUREG-1792 and the NRC 
staff's resolution of the comments and recommendations included 
in the May 13, 2004 ACRS letter.
 
11:15 a.m.-12:15 p.m.: Preparation for Meeting with the NRC 
Commissioners (Open)--The Committee will discuss the following 
topics scheduled for the ACRS meeting with the NRC Commissioners: 
(a) Sump Performance; (b) Risk-Informing 10 CFR 50.46; (c) 
Technical Basis for Potential Revision to the Pressurized Thermal 
Shock Screening Criteria; (d) License Renewal/Power Uprates; (e) 
Differences in Regulatory Approaches Between U.S. and Other 
Countries. 1:30 p.m.-3:30 p.m.: Meeting with the NRC 
Commissioners, Commissioners' Conference Room, One White Flint 
North, Rockville, MD (Open)--The Committee will meet with the NRC 
Commissioners to discuss the topics listed above.
 
4 p.m.-4:15 p.m.: Subcommittee Report (Open)--Report by the 
Acting Chairman of the ACRS Subcommittee on Plant License Renewal 
regarding interim review of the license renewal application for 
Millstone Power Station, Units 2 and 3 and the associated draft 
Safety Evaluation Report prepared by the NRC staff.
 
4:15 p.m.-6:30 p.m.: Preparation of ACRS Reports (Open)--The 
Committee will discuss proposed ACRS reports on matters 
considered during this meeting.
 
Friday, April 8, 2005, Conference Room T-2B3, Two White Flint 
North, Rockville, Maryland 8:30 a.m.-8:35 a.m.: Opening Remarks 
by the ACRS Chairman (Open)--The ACRS Chairman will make opening 
remarks regarding the conduct of the meeting.
 
8:35 a.m.-10:30 a.m.: Accident Sequence Precursor Program and 
Development of SPAR Models (Open)--The Committee will hear 
presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the 
NRC staff regarding the status of the Accident Sequence Precursor 
Program and development of the Standardized Plant Analysis Risk 
(SPAR) Models.
 
10:45 a.m.-11:45 a.m.: Future ACRS Activities/Report of the 
Planning and Procedures Subcommittee (Open)--The Committee will 
discuss the recommendations of the Planning and Procedures 
Subcommittee regarding items proposed for consideration by the 
full Committee during future meetings. Also, it will hear a 
report of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee on matters 
related to the conduct of ACRS business, including anticipated 
workload and member assignments.
 
11:45 a.m.-12 Noon: Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and 
Recommendations (Open)--The Committee will discuss the responses 
from the NRC Executive Director for Operations (EDO) to comments 
and recommendations included in recent ACRS reports and letters. 
The EDO responses are expected to be made available to the 
Committee prior to the meeting.
 
1 p.m.-6:30 p.m.: Preparation of ACRS Reports (Open)--The 
Committee will discuss proposed ACRS reports.
 
Saturday, April 9, 2005, Conference Room T-2B3, Two White Flint 
North, Rockville, Maryland 8:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m.: Preparation of 
ACRS Reports (Open)--The Committee will continue its discussion 
of proposed ACRS reports.
 
12:30 p.m.-1 p.m.: Miscellaneous (Open)--The Committee will 
discuss matters related to the conduct of Committee activities 
and matters and specific issues that were not completed during 
previous meetings, as time and availability of information 
permit.
 
Procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings 
were published in the Federal Register on October 5, 2004 (69 FR 
59620). In accordance with those procedures, oral or written 
views may be presented by members of the public, including 
representatives of the nuclear industry. Electronic recordings 
will be permitted only during the open portions of the meeting. 
Persons desiring to make oral statements should notify the 
Cognizant ACRS staff named below five days before the meeting, if 
possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made to allow 
necessary time during the meeting for such statements. Use of 
still, motion picture, and television cameras during the meeting 
may be limited to selected portions of the meeting as determined 
by the Chairman. Information regarding the time to be set
 
[[Page 13056]] aside for this purpose may be obtained by 
contacting the Cognizant ACRS staff prior to the meeting. In view 
of the possibility that the schedule for ACRS meetings may be 
adjusted by the Chairman as necessary to facilitate the conduct 
of the meeting, persons planning to attend should check with the 
Cognizant ACRS staff if such rescheduling would result in major 
inconvenience.
 
Further information regarding topics to be discussed, whether the 
meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, as well as the 
Chairman's ruling on requests for the opportunity to present oral 
statements and the time allotted therefor can be obtained by 
contacting Mr. Sam Duraiswamy, Cognizant ACRS staff 
(301-415-7364), between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., e.t. ACRS 
meeting agenda, meeting transcripts, and letter reports are 
available through the NRC Public Document Room at , or by calling 
the PDR at 1-800-397-4209, or from the Publicly Available Records 
System (PARS) component of NRC's document system (ADAMS) which is 
accessible from the NRC Web site at  or  (ACRS & ACNW Mtg 
schedules/agendas).
 
Videoteleconferencing service is available for observing open 
sessions of ACRS meetings. Those wishing to use this service for 
observing ACRS meetings should contact Mr. Theron Brown, ACRS 
Audio Visual Technician (301-415-8066), between 7:30 a.m. and 
3:45 p.m., e.t., at least 10 days before the meeting to ensure 
the availability of this service. Individuals or organizations 
requesting this service will be responsible for telephone line 
charges and for providing the equipment and facilities that they 
use to establish the videoteleconferencing link. The availability 
of videoteleconferencing services is not guaranteed.
 
Dated: March 11, 2005.
 
Andrew L. Bates, Advisory Committee Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. 05-5274 Filed 3-16-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 18 Xinhua: Nation develops nuclear power   

  www.xinhuanet.com
    
  www.chinaview.cn 2005-03-17 10:00:21   

    BEIJING, March. 17 -- Chinese Vice Premier Zeng Peiyan has
urged relevant departments to continue to develop China's
nuclear power capability when attending a contract signing
ceremony for the Ling'ao Nuclear Power Station.   

    Zeng Peiyan made the call after attending a contract signing
ceremony for the Ling'ao Nuclear Power Station, which plays an
important role in easing the power shortage in south China's
Guangdong province. 

    Under the contract, China's design academies will design the
nuclear power stations, while domestic manufacturers will supply
the necessary equipment. 

    Zeng Peiyan has stressed some departments may need to draw
on overseas technologies to strengthen the country's
capabilities to complete the manufacturing of nuclear power
stations in China. Enditem 

(Source:CRIENGLISH.com)
   
  Copyright Š2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 19 NRC: Subcommittee Meeting on Planning and Procedures; Notice of 
 
                         FR Doc 05-5275 
[Federal Register: March 17, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 51)]
[Notices]               
[Page 13056]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access
[wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr17mr05-92]                         
 
Meeting
The ACRS Subcommittee on Planning and Procedures will hold a 
meeting on April 6, 2005, Room T-2B1, 11545 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, 
Maryland.
 
The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, with
the 
exception of a portion that may be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
552b(c) 
(2) and (6) to discuss organizational and personnel matters that
relate 
solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of the
ACRS, and 
information the release of which would constitute a clearly
unwarranted 
invasion of personal privacy.
 
The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows:
Wednesday, April 6, 2005--10 a.m.-11:30 a.m.
The Subcommittee will discuss proposed ACRS activities and
related 
matters. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze
relevant 
issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions,
as 
appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee.
 
Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements
and/or 
written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official,
Mr. Sam 
Duraiswamy (telephone: 301-415-7364) between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15
p.m. 
(e.t.) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that
appropriate 
arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be
permitted only 
during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public.
 
Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained
by 
contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and
4:15 
p.m. (e.t.). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged
to 
contact the above named individual at least two working days
prior to 
the meeting to be advised of any potential changes in the agenda.
 
Dated: March 11, 2005.
 
Sharon A. Steele,
Acting Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW.
 
[FR Doc. 05-5275 Filed 3-16-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 20 NRC: Carolina Power & Light Company; Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 
 
                         FR Doc 05-5276 
[Federal Register: March 17, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 51)]
[Notices]               
[Page 13050-13051]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access
[wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr17mr05-87]                         
 
Units 1 and 2 Exemption
1.0 Background
The Carolina Power & Light Company (CP, the licensee) is the 
holder of Facility Operating Licenses Nos. DPR-71 and DPR-62,
which 
authorize operation of the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant
(BSEP), Units 
1 and 2. The licenses provide, among other things, that the
facility is 
subject to all rules, regulations, and orders of the U.S.
Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC, the Commission) now or hereafter in
effect.
 
The facility consists of two boiling-water reactors located
in 
Brunswick County in North Carolina.
 
2.0 Request/Action
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR),
Section 
50.54(o) requires that primary reactor containments for
water-cooled 
power reactors be subject to the requirements of Appendix J to
10 CFR 
Part 50. Appendix J specifies the leakage test requirements,
schedules, 
and acceptance criteria for tests of the leaktight integrity of
the 
primary reactor containment and systems and components that
penetrate 
the containment. Appendix J, Option B, Section III.A requires
that the 
overall integrated leak rate must not exceed the allowable
leakage (La) 
with margin, as specified in the Technical Specifications (TS).
 
The 
overall integrated leak rate, as specified in the 10 CFR Part
50, 
Appendix J definitions, includes the contribution from main
steam 
isolation valve (MSIV) leakage. By letter dated October 6, 2004,
the 
licensee has requested exemption from Option B, Section III.A 
requirements to permit exclusion of MSIV leakage from the
overall 
integrated leak rate test measurement.
 
Option B, Section III.B of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J
requires that 
the sum of the leakage rates of all Type B and Type C local leak
rate 
tests be less than the performance criterion (La) with margin,
as 
specified in the TS.
 
On May 30, 2002, the NRC issued Amendment Nos. 221 and 246
to the 
Facility Operating Licenses for BSEP, Units 1 and 2,
respectively. 
These amendments revised the TS to replace the accident source
term 
used in loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA), main steamline break
(MSLB) 
accident, and control rod drop accident (CRDA) design-basis
analyses 
with an alternate source term (AST) in accordance with 10 CFR
50.67, 
``Accident Source Term.'' On March 14, 2002, the NRC issued
Amendment 
Nos. 218 and 244 for BSEP, Units 1 and 2, respectively, revising
the 
facility TS to replace the accident source term used in the fuel 
handling accident (FHA) design-basis accident analyses with an
AST in 
accordance with 10 CFR 50.67. In the previous
 
[[Page 13051]]
design-basis accident radiological consequence analyses, MSIV
leakage 
was added to the overall containment integrated leakage rate, as 
measured by the Type A test specified in 10 CFR 50, Appendix J,
Option 
B. By Amendment Nos. 181 and 213 issued on February 1, 1996, for
BSEP 
Units 1 and 2, respectively, the licensee was authorized to use
the 
Option B provisions of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J.
 
Based on the Safety Evaluation supporting Amendment Nos. 221
and 
246 issued on May 30, 2002, the NRC has accepted that MSIV
leakage for 
design-basis accident analyses has been accounted for separately
from 
the overall leakage associated with the primary containment
boundary 
and overall doses meet appropriate regulatory limits. As such,
the 
requirement of 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, Option B, Section III.A
that MSIV 
leakage be included as part of the Type A test results is not
necessary 
to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule; that is, ensuring
the 
actual radiological consequences of design-basis accidents
remain below 
those analyzed as demonstrated through the measured containment
leakage 
test.
 
3.0 Discussion
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, the Commission may, upon
application by 
any interested person or upon its own initiative, grant
exemptions from 
the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 when (1) the exemptions are 
authorized by law, will not present an undue risk to public
health and 
safety, and are consistent with the common defense and security,
and 
(2) when special circumstances are present. Special
circumstances are 
present whenever, according to 10 CFR Part 50.12(a)(2)(ii), 
``Application of the regulation in the particular circumstances
would 
not serve the underlying purpose of the rule or is not necessary
to 
achieve the underlying purpose of the rule. * * *''
The underlying purpose of the rule that implements Appendix
J 
(i.e., 10 CFR 50.54(o)) is to assure that containment leaktight 
integrity is maintained (a) as tight as reasonably achievable,
and (b) 
sufficiently tight so as to limit effluent release to values
bounded by 
the analyses of radiological consequences of design-basis
accidents. 
The revised design-basis radiological consequences analyses
address 
these pathways as individual factors, exclusive of the primary 
containment leakage. The staff has determined that the intent of
the 
rule is not compromised by the proposed action, and that 10 CFR 
50.12(a)(2)(ii) applies.
4.0 Conclusion
Accordingly, the Commission has determined that pursuant to
10 CFR 
Part 50.12(a)(1), an exemption is authorized by law and will not 
present an undue risk to the public health and safety, is
consistent 
with the common defense and security, and that there are special 
circumstances present, as specified in 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2). An
exemption 
is hereby granted to CP, BSEP Units 1 and 2 from the
requirements of 
Sections III.A and III.B of Option B of Appendix J to 10 CFR
Part 50. 
The exemption allows exclusion of MSIV leakage from the overall 
integrated leak rate test measurement.
 
Based on the foregoing, the separation of the main steam
pathways 
from the other containment leakage pathways is warranted because
a 
separate radiological consequence term has been provided for
these 
pathways. The revised design-basis radiological consequences
analyses 
address these pathways as individual factors, exclusive of the
primary 
containment leakage. Therefore, the NRC staff finds the proposed 
exemption from Appendix J, to separate MSIV leakage from other 
containment leakage, to be acceptable.
 
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the Commission has determined that
the 
granting of this exemption will have no significant impact on
the 
quality of the human environment (70 FR 11034).
 
This exemption is effective upon issuance.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day of March 2005.
 
Ledyard B. Marsh,
Director, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of
Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation.
 
[FR Doc. 05-5276 Filed 3-16-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 21 NRC: Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power 
 
                         FR Doc 05-5277 
[Federal Register: March 17, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 51)] 
[Notices] [Page 13051-13052] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr17mr05-88]                         
 
Station; Notice of Issuance of Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 
2.206 Notice is hereby given that the Director, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has 
issued a Director's Decision on an April 23, 2004, petition by 
the New England Coalition, hereinafter referred to as the 
``Petitioner.'' The petition was supplemented on September 10, 
2004. The petition concerns the operation of the Vermont Yankee 
Nuclear Power Station (Vermont Yankee).
 
The basis for the April 23, 2004, petition, was the absence of 
two pieces of fuel rods in the spent fuel pool (SFP) at Vermont 
Yankee from their documented location. The Petitioner stated that 
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy or the licensee) had 
lost control of the spent fuel inventory at Vermont Yankee. The 
Petitioner would have no confidence that Entergy did not put 
leaking fuel rods or suspected leaking fuel assemblies back into 
the reactor core during the April 2004 refueling outage until 
Entergy accounted for all special nuclear material (SNM). The New 
England Coalition contends that operation with leaking fuel in 
the reactor core would be potentially unsafe and in violation of 
Federal regulations.
 
On May 5 and September 22, 2004, the Petitioner and the licensee 
met with the staff's Petition Review Board (PRB). These meetings 
gave the Petitioner and the licensee an opportunity to provide 
additional information and to clarify issues raised in the 
petition.
 
The NRC sent a copy of the proposed Director's Decision to the 
Petitioner and to the licensee for comment on December 27, 2004.
 
The Petitioner responded with comments on January 25, 2005. The 
comments and the NRC staff's responses are included in the 
Director's Decision. The staff did not receive any comments from 
the licensee.
 
The Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation denies 
the Petitioner's request that the NRC make Entergy do an accurate 
and NRC- verified inventory of the location, disposition, and 
condition of all irradiated fuel, including fuel currently loaded 
in the reactor, and order Entergy to halt all fuel movement at 
Vermont Yankee until the inventory is completed. The reasons for 
this decision are explained in the Director's Decision pursuant 
to Title 10 of Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 
2.206 (DD-05-01), the complete text of which is available in 
ADAMS for inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room at 
One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville 
Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, and from the ADAMS 
Public Library component of the NRC's Web site, 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html (the Public Electronic Reading 
Room).
 
The Petitioner's request that all fuel movement be stopped is 
moot. All fuel movement for the April 2004 refueling outage had 
been completed before the NRC received the petition. The licensee 
has completed a documented inventory to confirm the total number 
of fuel
 
[[Page 13052]] assemblies and their locations and the locations 
of the individual rods. The licensee successfully located the two 
fuel rod pieces in the SFP and did core verifications. The NRC 
therefore concludes that as of July 13, 2004, Entergy has been in 
full compliance with regulatory requirements to account for all 
SNM in its possession. Therefore the Petitioner's request has in 
effect been granted. The licensee took the requested actions 
voluntarily obviating the need for an order. Furthermore, the 
licensee has updated its inventory of SNM, so there is no need 
for the NRC to prohibit fuel movement.
 
The Petitioner claimed to have no confidence that Entergy did not 
put leaking fuel or suspected leaking fuel assemblies back into 
the reactor core during the last refueling outage. The NRC 
inspectors verified that no leaking fuel assemblies were reloaded 
in the reactor core. The NRC has concluded that Entergy is now in 
compliance with regulatory requirements to account for all SNM. 
However in the special inspection report issued on December 2, 
2004, the inspectors identified an apparent violation of 10 CFR 
74.19, ``Material Control and Accounting of Special Nuclear 
Material-Recordkeeping,'' related to the two spent fuel rod 
pieces. The NRC is considering escalated enforcement action for 
this finding.
 
A copy of the Director's Decision will be filed with the 
Secretary of the Commission for the Commission's review in 
accordance with 10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission's regulations. As 
provided for by this regulation, the Director's Decision will 
constitute the final action of the Commission 25 days after the 
date of the decision, unless the Commission, on its own motion, 
institutes a review of the Director's Decision in that time.
 
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of March 2005.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
J.E. Dyer, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 
[FR Doc. 05-5277 Filed 3-16-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 22 Sofia Morning News: EP Delegation to Inspect Bulgaria's Nuke
                    
Sofia News Agency

Politics: 17 March 2005, Thursday.

A European Parliament (EP) delegation will pay a visit the
Bulgaria's only nuclear power plant Kozloduy on March 22.
 
The 23 MEPs will come to Bulgaria on the invitation of
Kozloduy's nuke Executive Director Yordan Kostadinov. He
extended the invitation during a European Energy Forum (EEF)
meeting in Strasbourg in November 2004.
 
The delegation, which includes representatives of UK, Germany,
Greece, Spain and Hungary, will be headed by Socialist Group
member Terence Wynn.
 
Just a day earlier Nuclear Engineering Magazine cited Geoffrey
Van Orden, the European Parliament's Rapporteur for Bulgaria as
saying that Bulgaria would be given approval to develop a new
nuclear reactor. 

The report, which will require approval from the European
Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee, will eventually form the
basis of the country's European Union accession. The document
includes specific references to Kozloduy, Bulgaria's only
operating nuclear power plant, which is to close down two more
nuclear units in 2006.[ width=] 

  novinite.com  Forum  Google  Tourism  Business  MobileBulgaria
               
 All Rights Reserved Š Novinite Ltd., 2001-2005 - Copyright

Bulgaria news Novinite.com (Sofia News Agency -
www.sofianewsagency.com) is unique with being a real time news
provider in English that informs its readers about the latest
Bulgarian news. The editorial staff also publishes a daily
*****************************************************************
 23 NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for the 
 
                         FR Doc 05-5278 
[Federal Register: March 17, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 51)] 
[Notices] [Page 13049-13050] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr17mr05-86]                         
 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Comment Request 
AGENCY: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Notice 
of the OMB review of information collection and solicitation of 
public comment.
 
SUMMARY: The NRC has recently submitted to OMB for review the 
following proposal for the collection of information under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
chapter 35). The NRC hereby informs potential respondents that an 
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and that a person is not 
required to respond
 
[[Page 13050]] to, a collection of information unless it displays 
a currently valid OMB control number.
 
1. Type of submission, new, revision, or extension: Extension.
 
2. The title of the information collection: DOE/NRC Form 741, 
Nuclear Material Transaction Report; DOE/NRC Form 740M, Concise 
Note; and NUREG/BR-0006, Revision 6, Instructions for Completing 
Nuclear Material Transaction Reports (DOE/NRC Forms 741 and 
740M).
 
3. The form number if applicable: DOE/NRC Form 741: 3150-0003.
 
DOE/NRC Form 740M: 3150-0057.
 
4. How often the collection is required: DOE/NRC Form 741: As 
occasioned by special nuclear material or source material 
transfers, receipts, or inventory changes that meet certain 
criteria. Licensees range from not submitting any forms to 
submitting over 5,000 forms annually.
 
DOE/NRC Form 740M: As necessary to inform the U.S. or the 
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of any qualifying 
statement or exception to any of the data contained in any of the 
other reporting forms required under the US/IAEA Safeguards 
Agreement. On average, 15 licensees submit about 10 forms each 
per year--150 forms annually.
 
5. Who will be required or asked to report: Persons licensed to 
possess specified quantities of special nuclear material or 
source material, and licensees of facilities on the U.S. eligible 
list who have been notified in writing by the Commission that 
they are subject to part 75.
 
6. An estimate of the number of responses: DOE/NRC Forms 741: 
36,650.
 
DOE/NRC Form 740M: 150.
 
7. An estimate of the number of annual respondents: DOE/NRC Forms 
741: 400.
 
DOE/NRC Form 740M: 15.
 
8. The number of hours needed annually to complete the 
requirement or request: DOE/NRC Form 741: 45,813 hours for NRC 
and Agreement State licensees (or an average of 1.25 hours per 
response); DOE/NRC Form 740M: 113 hours (or an average of .75 
hours per response). 9. An indication of whether section 3507(d), 
Pub. L. 104-13 applies: NA.
 
10. Abstract: NRC and Agreement State licensees are required to 
make inventory and accounting reports on DOE/NRC Forms 741 for 
certain source or special nuclear material, or for transfer or 
receipt of 1 kilogram or more of source material. Licensees 
affected by part 75 and related sections of parts 40, 50, 70, and 
150 are required to submit DOE/NRC Form 740M to inform the U.S. 
or the IAEA of any qualifying statement or exception to any of 
the data contained in any of the other reporting forms required 
under the US/IAEA Safeguards Agreement.
 
The use of Forms 740M and 741, together with NUREG/BR-0006, 
Revision 6, the instructions for completing the forms, enables 
NRC to collect, retrieve, analyze as necessary, and submit the 
data to IAEA to fulfill its reporting responsibilities.
 
A copy of the final supporting statement may be viewed free of 
charge at the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North, 
11555 Rockville Pike, Room O-1 F21, Rockville, MD 20852. OMB 
clearance requests are available at the NRC worldwide Web site 
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html. The 
document will be available on the NRC home page site for 60 days 
after the signature date of this notice.
 
Comments and questions should be directed to the OMB reviewer 
listed below by April 18, 2005. Comments received after this date 
will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of 
consideration cannot be given to comments received after this 
date.
 
John Asalone, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 
(3150-0003; -0057), NEOB-10202, Office of Management and Budget, 
Washington, DC 20503.
 
Comments can also be e-mailed to John_A._Asalone@ombeop.gov or 
submitted by telephone at (202) 395-3087.
 
The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda Jo. Shelton, (301) 415-7233.
 
Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of March, 2005.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Brenda Jo. Shelton, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information 
Services.
 
[FR Doc. 05-5278 Filed 3-16-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 24 Hawk Eye: Explosion causes IAAP fire 

Wednesday, March 16, 2005 Site updated daily at 11 a.m. CST   
      
MIDDLETOWN  A grass fire Monday at the Iowa Army Ammunition
Plant was caused by a small explosion, plant officials said
Tuesday. 

Less than four pounds of explosive detonated at about 11:45
a.m., igniting a fire that burned around the Line 3 building,
according to a press release from American Ordnance LLC. 

The building was unoccupied at the time and the plant fire
department extinguished the fire with assistance from Danville
Fire and Rescue. There were no injuries in the explosion or
fire. 

Other plant operations were unaffected by the incident and the
plant is operating on a normal work schedule. 

The American Ordnance news release said no further reports would
be forthcoming about the fire. 

Company spokesman Jon Phillips said the cause of the explosion
was still unknown and an investigation is continuing.   
  
The Hawk Eye 800 S. Main St., Burlington, Iowa 52601 319-754-8461 
ˇ 1-800-397-1708 ˇ FAX 319-754-6824 ˇ webmaster@thehawkeye.com
*****************************************************************
 25 Hawk Eye: Weapons workers still wait 

Wednesday, March 16, 2005 Site updated daily at 11 a.m. CST   
      
Bureaucracy bogs down panel's recommendation to expedite medical
compensation claims. 

From staff and wire reports 

MIDDLETOWN  One month after ruling Iowa Army Ammunition Plant
workers with cancer should get government money, an advisory
board to the National Institute of Occupational Safety and
Health still has not passed its recommendation up the
bureaucratic chain. 

"Am I crazy, or is this inexcusable?" said Charlotte Hovanec, a
former plant employee with cancer whose father also worked at
the plant and died of the disease. 

The Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health decided at a
February meeting in St. Louis that employees in the plant's
nuclear weapons program should automatically receive $150,000 if
diagnosed with one of 22 cancers. 

About 4,000 workers assembled and testfired nuclear weapons at
the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant at Middletown from the late1940s
to the mid1970s. Many became ill after exposure to radioactive
or harmful materials. 

In 2000, Congress approved compensation for the nation's former
nuclear weapons workers. Immediate payment was authorized for
workers in Ohio, Tennessee, Kentucky and Alaska, but workers at
IAAP and a handful of other factories were left out and, because
of a series of bureaucratic glitches, fewer than 50 claims in
Iowa have been paid. 

The advisory board's decision should have sped the claims by
eliminating the timeconsuming effort to determine the amount of
radiation exposure. 

Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt is next in
line to take up the IAAP issue. He has 30 days to review the
advisory board's recommendation and make his own judgment.
Congress then has another 30 days to check on Leavitt's action. 

Put them together, and the former workers and their families who
traveled to St. Louis last month figured a final decision would
be reached by April. 

But as of Tuesday, Leavitt still did not have the advisory
board's recommendation on his desk. 

"These people (the former workers), have been lied to and misled
for years, and now this," said Hovanec, who now lives in
Pennsylvania. 

Calls to both NIOSH and Leavitt's office Friday made little
headway. 

Subsequent efforts to contact advisory board Chairman Paul
Ziemer through NIOSH channels were unsuccessful. 

Sen. Tom Harkin, DIowa, jumped into the issue Tuesday, writing
a letter to both Ziemer and NIOSH head John Howard chiding them
for the continued delays. 

"It is simply unfathomable that ... the advisory board could not
complete and transmit a simple letter in less than a month,"
Harkin wrote. 

Harkin reminded Zeimer and Howard that IAAP workers have "been
waiting almost five years" while officials decided on their next
step. 

Fred Blosser, a NIOSH spokesman, said Howard and Ziemer have
been waiting for a Department of Energy report that includes a
site profile of the plant before forwarding the board's
recommendation. 

That report was received Monday and would need to be reviewed,
he said. 

He said the agency will respond to Harkin's letter, but he
wouldn't speculate on the chances of the board's recommendation
going forward. 

No time is soon enough for Hovanec, who watched her father,
Herbert Specketer, die "a horrible death" and now has cancer on
her neck and back. 

She said the federal government purposely deceived plant workers
decades ago and is continuing the lies today. 

"It's the deception that makes it murder," Hovanec said. "When
you purposely put someone in danger knowing that what you are
doing could kill them, to me that's murder."   
  
The Hawk Eye 800 S. Main St., Burlington, Iowa 52601 319-754-8461 
ˇ 1-800-397-1708 ˇ FAX 319-754-6824 ˇ webmaster@thehawkeye.com
*****************************************************************
 26 KVOA: High beryllium levels found in Sunnyside School District

March 17, 2005   

  Jennifer Reardon Reports
 
Levels of the dangerous element Beryllium are once again testing
high in the Sunnyside School District. 

Eyewitness News 4 wants to make sure people understand what
Beryllium is, and the threat it poses. 

Beryllium is a metal that occurs naturally in rock, soil and
coal. 

Acute Beryllium Disease comes from breathing in high
concentrations of Beryllium in dust and metal fumes. 

Chronic Beryllium Disease is an incurable lung disease caused by
Beryllium dust and fumes. 

Recent test results within the Sunnyside School District show
elevated levels of Beryllium on school property. Swipe tests
were done on untouched areas like duct work inside the
district's warehouse. 

"We have had some tests that have shown higher concentrations
than some of the other ones," says Sunnyside Assistant
Superintendent Gene Repola. 

Other ones meaning air monitoring tests that have taken place
within the district for the past three years. Recent swipe
testing of surfaces is what has accumulated higher levels of
Beryllium. 

"It's used inside facilities that use beryllium. That's the only
thing you have to measure the results against," says Repola. 

Facilities like the nearby Brush Ceramics Plant, which uses
Beryllium Oxide to manufacture ceramics. 

It is located just blocks away from Sunnyside school property: a
location that sits too close for comfort for some, but has the
company's general manager defending its position. 

"All of the evidence points to the fact that there is no threat
to the community from this plant," says John Scheatzle. 

Scheatzle describes the threat of Beryllium as an on-the-job
hazard rather than a community health concern. He says since
1992, only two employees at the Tucson plant have been diagnosed
with Chronic Beryllium Disease. 

"The risk comes in the workplace, where workers could be exposed
to airborne particulates that could get into their lungs, and we
work very hard to prevent that." 

The question the recent testing still can't answer is whether
the Beryllium detected on school grounds is from soil and dust,
or is a byproduct of the industrial plants surrounding the
Sunnyside School District. 

Environmental tests will continue, but at this time the school
has been determined safe for students and staff.   

Copyright 2003 - 2005 WorldNow and KVOA. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 27 Urgent: No nuke waste on Native lands! Please help by signing
 
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:10:06 -0800

 
<x-flowed>

PREVENT RADIOACTIVE RACISM!



Sign your group onto letter to Nuclear Regulatory Commission opposing 
high-level radioactive waste dump

targeted at Skull Valley Goshute Indian Reservation in Utah

by emailing persons name, title (if any), group name, city and state to 
<mailto:Kevin@nirs.org>kevin@nirs.org

as soon as possible (by Sunday, March 27 at the latest)



The greatest minds in the nuclear establishment have been searching for an 
answer to the radioactive waste problem for fifty years, and theyve finally 
got one: haul it down a dirt road and dump it on an Indian reservation.



---Winona LaDuke, Honor the Earth





Dear Friends and Colleagues who oppose the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump,



             In spring, 2002 you (or someone else from your group) signed a 
group letter opposing the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump on the eve of 
the U.S. House and Senate votes to override Nevadas veto. Thank you for 
your crucial support in that long, ongoing struggle. Youll be pleased to 
know that the Yucca dump proposal is experiencing major problems, although 
it is far from dead. We need to remain ever vigilant against it.



Im writing you now about a related environmental justice matter that has 
taken on great urgency. Culminating an almost eight-year-long process, a 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Licensing Board on February 24, 
2005 ruled in favor of granting a license to the proposed Private Fuel 
Storage, LLC (PFS) high-level radioactive waste dump targeted at the Skull 
Valley Goshute Indian Reservation in Utah.



Opening of this dump would initiate the transportation 4,000 high-level 
radioactive waste casks by train across the U.S., putting millions of 
people in jeopardy of a Mobile Chernobyl from an accident or terrorist 
attack (to see how close such routes could pass by you, go to 
<http://www.ewg.org/reports/nuclearwaste/find_address.php>http://www.ewg.org/reports/nuclearwaste/find_address.php.) 
PFS would store 44,000 tons of irradiated nuclear fuel nearly 80% of the 
commercial high-level radioactive waste that currently exists in the U.S. 
on the tiny Goshute reservation.



The Skull Vally Goshute community is already surrounded by toxic industrial 
and military facilities, such as U.S. Army nerve gas incinerators and 
storage, the Dugway Proving Ground for chemical/biological/radiological 
weaponry, and the Hill Air Force Base/Utah Test and Training Range (the 
largest bombing range in the country), the single biggest emitter of 
gaseous chlorine in the U.S. (Magnesium Corporation on the Great Salt 
Lake), a lowlevel radioactive waste dump, hazardous waste dumps and 
incinerators, etc. Adding high-level radioactive waste to this toxic mix is 
blatant environmental racism.  Margene Bullcreek, the leader of the 
opposition to the dump within the tribe, was quoted in the New York Times 
on Feb. 28 Were concerned with health, but its also the land we believe in. 
I think this could destroy whatever sacredness is there.



According to Chris Peters of the Seventh Generation Fund in Arcata, CA, 
this very same dump, pushed by the U.S. nuclear establishment in government 
and industry since 1987, has been targeted at scores of tribes. All of them 
--  most often led by women tribal members (such as Grace Thorpe at Sauk 
and Fox Reservation in Oklahoma, and Rufina Marie Laws at Mescalero Apache 
Reservation in New Mexico) -- have fended off the proposed dumps, until 
now. None has gone as far as PFS targeted at the Skull Valley Goshutes 
Reservation. But it too can and must be stopped. (See 
<http://www.nirs.org/factsheets/pfsejfactsheet.htm>http://www.nirs.org/factsheets/pfsejfactsheet.htm 
for more background information.)

A national, group sign-on letter (see <http://www.nirs.org/>www.nirs.org 
for the letter under the Feb. 24 alert, or the letter and complete list of 
signatories under the March 14 update), urging the NRC Commissioners to 
reject the PFS license application, was delivered on Monday, March 14 
signed by 240 organizations (19 Native American groups, 21 national U.S. 
groups, 193 regional/state/local U.S. groups, and 7 international groups), 
whose combined memberships represent millions of people. Skull Valley 
Goshute tribal members opposed to the dump topped the list of signatories.

Please consider signing on to this important solidarity letter, by sending 
your name, title (if any), organization, city and state to 
<mailto:kevin@nirs.org>kevin@nirs.org by Sunday, March 27.

Please spread the word to other, kindred spirit groups which might also 
sign on. Thanks for your help!

---Kevin Kamps, Nuclear Information & Resource Service, Washington, D.C., 
202.328.0002 ext. 14, <mailto:kevin@nirs.org>kevin@nirs.org , www.nirs.org

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 28 Documents for Nuclear Waste Project May Have Been Falsified,
 
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:00:15 -0600 (CST)

 
ENN: Environmental News Network
Documents for Nuclear Waste Project May Have Been Falsified, Government Says

March 17, 2005 b By H. Josef Hebert, Associated Press

http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=7351

WASHINGTON b Government employees may have falsified documents related to 
the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste project in Nevada, the Energy Department 
said Wednesday. The disclosure could jeopardize the project's ability to get 
a federal permit to operate the dump.

During preparation for a license application to the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, the department said it found a number of e-mails from 1998 
through 2000 in which an employee of the U.S. Geological Survey "indicated 
that he had fabricated documentation of his work."

Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said the department is investigating what 
kind of information was falsified and whether it would affect the scientific 
underpinnings of the project.

"If in the course of that review any work is found to be deficient, it will 
be replaced or supplemented with analysis and documents that meet 
appropriate quality assurance standards," said Bodman. He said he was 
"greatly disturbed" by the development.

The department said the questionable data involved computer modeling for 
water infiltration and climate at the Yucca site, which is 90 miles 
northwest of Las Vegas.

At a House hearing Wednesday, the official who recently took over the Yucca 
program in the Energy Department indicated that the revelations could 
further delay the project.

"I assure you we will not proceed until we have rectified these problems," 
Theodore Garrish told Rep. David Hobson, R-Ohio, chairman of the House 
Appropriations subcommittee that controls the dollars for Yucca Mountain.

Garrish was not asked to elaborate. After the hearing, he declined to answer 
reporters' questions.

Hobson said the problem did not appear too serious and that he did not think 
it would throw Yucca Mountain off track.

"As I understand it this is not a major impediment and can be corrected very 
easily," Hobson told reporters. "Some people just don't want to do their job 
right, so they'll slip it through rather than doing their job. We don't have 
any evidence that somebody directed anybody to do this."

Chip Groat, director of the Geological Survey, said the e-mails "have raised 
serious questions about the review process of scientific studies done six 
years ago."

The disclosure follows other setbacks for the proposed waste dump. The 
department has delayed filing its license application to nuclear regulators 
and now acknowledges that the planned completion of the facility by 2010 no 
longer is possible. Garrish told the committee Wednesday that he couldn't 
provide a new completion date.

Congress last year refused to provide all the money sought by the Bush 
administration for the project. A federal appeals court rejected the 
radiation protection standards established by the Environmental Protection 
Agency; the agency is developing new standards.

Last month, the official in charge of the Yucca project resigned, citing 
personal reasons.

The discovery of the e-mails "really casts the project in a real bad light. 
In lieu of the other problems, it might be the one that pushes it over the 
edge to cancellation," said Bob Loux, Nevada state Nuclear Projects director 
and Gov. Kenny Guinn's chief anti-Yucca administrator.

Loux said potential water transport -- the issue that some of the 
questionable work apparently involved -- is critical for the proposed waste 
repository.

Water is "the key mechanism at Yucca Mountain both in terms of infiltrating 
into the site and in terms of letting radioactivity release into the 
biosphere," Loux said.

Word that documents may have been falsified "certainly calls into question 
DOE's ability to submit any kind of a license application in the near term," 
Loux said.

In a statement, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the 
development "proves once again that DOE must cheat and lie in order to make 
Yucca Mountain look safe."

Bodman said the questionable documents were part of the papers required by 
the NRC to verify the accuracy of earlier work in the project.

"The fact remains that this country needs a permanent geological nuclear 
waste repository, and the administration will continue to aggressively 
pursue that goal," Bodman said. He said that "all related decisions have 
been, and will continue to be, based on sound science."

Source: Associated Press
*****************************************************************
 29 www.GovExec.com - USGS employee may have falsified Yucca Mountain documents 

DAILY BRIEFING  
March 17, 2005 

From Global Security Newswire

Plans for a nuclear waste storage site at Yucca Mountain in 
Nevada suffered a potential setback yesterday when the Energy 
Department reported that documents for the facility might have 
been falsified, the Associated Press reported.

E-mails sent by a U.S. Geological Survey staffer between May 1998 
and March 2000 "indicated that he had fabricated documentation of 
his work," the agency said Wednesday in a statement.

The staffer was preparing computer models on water infiltration 
and climate at Yucca Mountain, AP reported. Both matters would be 
crucial in estimating how radiation from waste stored at the site 
might spread, Nevada officials said.

It appears that a number of scientists were involved in the 
misrepresentation, AP reported. Details on specific numbers of 
personnel or what jobs they held were not released.

Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said his department is working to 
determine exactly what information was falsified and how that 
might affect the scientific basis for the storage site.

"If in the course of that review any work is found to be 
deficient, it will be replaced or supplemented with analysis and 
documentation that meets appropriate quality assurance 
standards," Bodman said in the statement.

This new development could delay or even undo the government's 
efforts to obtain a federal license for Yucca Mountain, AP 
reported.

Yucca program chief Theodore Garrish told a House Appropriations 
subcommittee yesterday that the Energy Department is "100 percent 
committed" to the project.

"I assure you we will not proceed until we have rectified these 
problems," he said.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said in a statement 
that the revelation "proves once again that DOE must cheat and 
lie to make Yucca Mountain look safe."

The falsification "is not a major impediment and can be corrected 
very easily," said House Appropriations Energy and Water 
Subcommittee Chairman David Hobson, R-Ohio. "Some people just 
don't want to do their job right, so they'll slip it through 
rather than doing their job. We don't have any evidence that 
somebody directed anybody to do this."

*****************************************************************
 30 deseret news: Was Yucca data falsified? 

[deseretnews.com] 

Thursday, March 17, 2005 

Allegations could boost plans for Utah waste site 

By Joe Bauman Deseret Morning News 

Another roadblock went up Wednesday in front of the planned Yucca
Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository in Nevada, with claims that 
federal scientific studies were falsified. 

Deseret Morning News graphic 

The allegations  about the possibility of water seeping 
into the repository  seem likely to cause further delays and 
other problems at Yucca Mountain, where the nation's spent 
nuclear fuel rods were to be permanently stored, theoretically 
by 2010. 

Even as Yucca Mountain continues to be scrutinized, the 
permitting process has been accelerating for a "temporary" 
storage facility for the same high-level radioactive waste in 
Utah's Skull Valley. The latest developments could impact Utah a 
couple of ways: 

 They could make the proposed Private Fuel Storage plant 
in Tooele County more desirable to the federal government as a 
site for storing the highly radioactive waste from nuclear power 
plants. If Yucca Mountain's problems prove insurmountable, that 
could increase the odds that PFS is not only built, but it might 
become a permanent storage area, opponents fear. 

 Or, a Utah official said Wednesday, the setback could 
convince the federal government to keep the nuclear waste at the 
power plants where it is being generated, as has been proposed 
by Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. 

"I think that Skull Valley has always been an emergency 
Plan B"  a fall-back facility, said activist Chip Ward, a Utah 
author who has been worried about the PFS plant for years. "It 
was emergency Plan B for nuclear utilities, and now it may be 
emergency Plan B for the NRC," the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, which may soon approve the PFS proposal. "That's 
very disturbing," he said. 

He called for Utah's U.S. senators to stop supporting the 
move to store waste at Yucca Mountain. That bandwagon, Ward 
said, has four flat tires. 

Meanwhile, Denise Chancellor, assistant Utah attorney 
general, said the developments may make "Harry Reid's proposal 
more attractive, which is to keep the fuel at reactor sites 
until they can figure it all out." Reid, the Senate minority 
leader, opposes the Yucca Mountain project in his home state. 

Chancellor is leading Utah's nearly 8-year-old fight 
against a "temporary" spent-fuel dump proposed for the Skull 
Valley Indian Reservation 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. 
She said she was filing a motion Wednesday asking the NRC's 
Atomic Safety Licensing Board to reconsider the danger that the 
Skull Valley canisters could break open and spread radiation if 
hit by a crashing aircraft under a military flight path. 

In Washington, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman issued a 
written statement regarding the falsification claims. "I am 
greatly disturbed by the possibility that any of the work 
related to the Yucca Mountain project may have been falsified," 
he said Wednesday. 

Little construction has occurred at Yucca Mountain. It 
has not yet received a license, but in July 2004, a federal 
appeals court ruled in favor of the site. "Our scientific basis 
for the Yucca Mountain project is sound," Spencer Abraham, then 
the secretary of the U.S. Department of Energy, said in response 
to the dismissal of the legal challenges. 

But now the repository's scientific studies are being 
called into question. 

On Wednesday, Chip Groat, director of the U.S. Geological 
Survey, said e-mails by USGS employees raised serious questions 
about the review process of scientific studies done six years 
ago on the site. 

Doubts now exist about studies in the 1998-2000 period 
regarding the likelihood of water seeping into the repository. 
Employees are alleged "to have committed improprieties after 
moving into the quality assurance phase" needed for the U.S. 
Department of Energy's licensing process, says a DOE press 
release. 

"The e-mails indicated that employees involved in studies 
of water infiltration and climate may have falsified 
documentation of their work." 

Groat said these were serious questions about quality 
assurance practices. "Two actions are under way to investigate 
these issues," he said. 

"First, I have referred the matter to the inspector 
general (of the Interior Department) for action. Second, I have 
initiated an internal review of the allegations." 

Once the facts are known, Groat added, "appropriate 
actions will be taken." 

Neither the DOE nor the USGS would speak on the record 
about the matter, other than official written statements. 

A DOE release faxed to the Deseret Morning News said the 
documentation in question relates to computer modeling involving 
water infiltration. 

"During the document review process associated with the 
Licensing Support Network preparation for the Yucca Mountain 
project, DOE contractors discovered multiple e-mails written 
between May 1998 and March 2000 in which a USGS employee 
indicated that he had fabricated documentation of his work," 
said Bodman's formal statement. 

The DOE has started checking the data in the study and 
the documentation that was used. If any work is found deficient, 
"it will be replaced or supplemented with analysis and 
documentation that meets appropriate quality assurance 
standards," he added. 

In addition, all of the work completed by anyone 
identified is being thoroughly reviewed "to ensure that other 
work was not affected," he said. 

Bodman called behavior indicated in the e-mails 
"completely unacceptable." 

He added that the safe handling and disposal of nuclear 
waste, and the sound scientific basis for the repository's 
safety analyses, are priorities for the DOE. "All related 
decisions have been, and will continue to be, based on sound 
science. 

"The fact remains that this country needs a permanent 
geological nuclear waste repository, and the administration will 
continue to aggressively pursue that goal. We are committed to 
the safety and protection of the citizens of Nevada as we pursue 
the development of the Yucca Mountain project." 

Meanwhile, the PFS project in Tooele County seemed to be 
on a fast track. This facility would be built on land owned by 
the Skull Valley Band of the Goshute Indian Tribe. 

PFS is proposing the temporary storage of nuclear power 
plant spent fuel rods at the site, with temporary defined as up 
to 40 years. But another concern of opponents is that storage 
there might turn out to be permanent. 

In February, the NRC Safety and Licensing Board dismissed 
allegations by the state of Utah that the Skull Valley site 
would be unsafe because of overflights by F-16s from Hill Air 
Force Base. This week, NRC Chairman Nils A. Diaz dismissed 
concerns about terrorist attacks against the PFS site. 

Ward speculated that the latest troubles at Yucca 
Mountain could have been the backdrop of "some of the comments 
coming out of the NRC" that supported the Utah site. Perhaps NRC 
officials knew of this study's problem before it was made 
public, he said. 

Contributing: Associated Press 
E-mail: bau@desnews.com 

Š 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company 
*****************************************************************
 31 Nevada Appeal: Nevada leaders react to the Yucca Mountain admission

March 17, 2005                                                                  
               
 Nevada officials expressed anger but little surprise over
Wednesday's admission that a U.S. Geological Survey employee
apparently falsified documentation about environmental safety
studies at Yucca Mountain.

"I am both disappointed and outraged by this development but
hardly surprised," Gov. Kenny Guinn said. 

The federal Department of Energy has admitted the data being
questioned involves computer modeling for water infiltration
through the mountain. That issue is critical because water flow
through the mountain could corrode storage containers and then
carry radioactive waste into the water table just 75 miles north
of Las Vegas.

The reaction from Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., was similar.

"Unfortunately, I am not surprised to learn that reports
regarding the safety of Yucca Mountain may have been falsified
or fabricated," he said.

He said the allegations "are extremely serious and should halt
the licensing process in its tracks" while all documentation and
scientific studies related to the nuclear dump project are
re-evaluated.

Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the admission "proves once again
that DOE must cheat and lie in order to make Yucca Mountain look
safe."

"We aren't just talking about false documentation on paper," he
said. "This is about the health and safety of Nevadans and the
American people."

He said he and Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., are working on
legislation now to allow waste to be stored on-site at nuclear
facilities and predicts that the dump will never be built.

And he expressed disappointment that President Bush continues to
push the project.

n Contact reporter Geoff Dornan at gdornan@nevadaappeal.comor
687-8750.

All contents Š Copyright 2005 nevadaappeal.com
Nevada Appeal - 580 Mallory Way - Carson City, NV 89701                         
*****************************************************************
 32 Las Vegas SUN: Government: Nuke Waste Papers May Be False

Today: March 17, 2005 at 7:41:36 PST 

 By ERICA WERNER ASSOCIATED PRESS 

WASHINGTON (AP) - 

The government disclosed that scientists on the Yucca Mountain
project may have falsified documents, dealing the latest blow to
plans to bury the nation's nuclear waste in Nevada. 

Supporters of the nuclear waste dump insisted the development
wouldn't derail it. 

Yucca Mountain has suffered so many setbacks that a top Energy
Department official couldn't tell lawmakers a projected
completion date Wednesday. The disclosure about the documents
could jeopardize the government's ability to get a federal
license to open the dump or delay the license even more. 

At the least, it hands Nevada one more weapon as it fights to
kill the dump. 

"This strikes at the very heart of the technical dispute between
the state of Nevada and the Energy Department," said Joe Egan,
Nevada's attorney in the dump fight. "That's what we're
preparing to litigate." 

A statement Wednesday from Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said
that during preparation for a license application to nuclear
regulators, the department found e-mails from May 1998 through
March 2000 in which an employee of the U.S. Geological Survey
"indicated that he had fabricated documentation of his work." 

The development "proves once again that DOE must cheat and lie
in order to make Yucca Mountain look safe," Senate Minority
Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said in a statement. 

The documents involved computer modeling for water infiltration
and climate at the Yucca site 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
Nevada officials say water movement is critical in determining
the possible spread of radiation from the proposed waste
repository. 

Bodman said the department was investigating what kind of
information was falsified and whether it would affect the
scientific underpinnings of the project. 

"If in the course of that review any work is found to be
deficient, it will be replaced or supplemented with analysis and
documentation that meets appropriate quality assurance
standards," said Bodman. He said he was "greatly disturbed" by
the development. 

At a House hearing Wednesday, the official who recently took
over the Yucca program in the Energy Department said the
department remained "100 percent committed" to creating the
permanent repository. 

"I assure you we will not proceed until we have rectified these
problems," Theodore Garrish told Rep. David Hobson, R-Ohio,
chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee that controls
the dollars for Yucca Mountain. 

Garrish was not asked to elaborate. After the hearing, he
refused to answer reporters' questions. 

Statements from Bodman and Chip Groat, director of the
Geological Survey, indicated that multiple scientists were
involved but not how many. It wasn't clear what the workers'
roles were or how they've been dealt with. 

Hobson said the problem did not appear too serious and shouldn't
hurt Yucca Mountain. 

"As I understand it this is not a major impediment and can be
corrected very easily," Hobson told reporters. "Some people just
don't want to do their job right, so they'll slip it through
rather than doing their job. We don't have any evidence that
somebody directed anybody to do this." 

The documents were part of the papers required by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission to verify the accuracy of earlier work in
the project. 

The department has delayed filing its license application to the
NRC and now acknowledges that completing the facility by 2010 no
longer is possible. Garrish couldn't provide a new completion
date Wednesday. 

--- 

Associated Press writers H. Josef Hebert in Washington and Ken
Ritter in Las Vegas contributed to this report. 

--- 

On the Net: 

Yucca Mountain background:
http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/ymp/index.shtml

*****************************************************************
 33 KRWB: Scientists suspected of falsifying documents on nuclear waste site

KR Washington Bureau 

| 03/16/2005 | 

By Seth Borenstein

 Knight Ridder Newspapers

WASHINGTON - Federal scientists may have falsified documents on a 
key safety issue for the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear-waste 
dump, two federal agencies said Wednesday. 

        If the allegations prove true, it could delay and 
possibly kill the controversial plan to bury nuclear waste in a 
mountain 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas starting in about a 
dozen years. That would be a major blow to the stalled Bush 
energy plan, which calls for building new nuclear-power plants 
provided there's someplace to store their waste, said Henry Lee, 
a Harvard University energy and environment professor. 

        Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said "certain employees of 
the U.S. Geological Survey ... may have falsified documentation 
of their work" on Yucca Mountain from 1998 to 2000. The Energy 
Department declined to reveal specifics. 

        The falsification charge involves about 10 employees of 
the U.S. Geological Survey, the scientific arm of the Interior 
Department, which was hired to do scientific analysis of water 
and geology at the site, USGS spokeswoman A.B. Wade said. 
Suspicions of falsification arose after the discovery of about 20 
e-mails among USGS employees that didn't admit to falsifying 
documents but gave the impression that something was amiss. 

        The falsification investigation is focused on the $58 
billion project's most contentious scientific safety question: 
Can water seep into the waste site? 

        The Energy Department has long maintained that little or 
no water penetrates 800 feet into the mountain, where 154 million 
pounds of radioactive nuclear waste will be stored in metal 
containers. Government studies have supported that claim. 
Opponents - including some scientists and the state of Nevada - 
have contended that water could get into the mountain, corrode 
the canisters, then seep out as radioactive water to where people 
live. 

        "Everything is about water," Michael Voegele, the chief 
scientist for Bechtel SAIC, the contractor operating Yucca 
Mountain, said in an interview three years ago. 

        "Water is the absolute key to knowing whether Yucca 
Mountain is determined safe or not," said Bob Loux, the executive 
director of Nevada's nuclear projects office and a fierce foe of 
the waste site. "It's very disturbing, in the sense that there's 
a heck of a lot of trust - not necessarily in Nevada, but in the 
Department of Energy - in conducting these studies in a 
scientific manner." 

        The potential for falsification - which Bechtel 
discovered last week - calls into question the science behind the 
Yucca program. That will require proponents to start anew with 
scientific justification of the more than 20-year-old program, 
Harvard's Lee said. 

        "Holy mackerel, what were they thinking?" Lee said. "In 
order to gain credibility back again, you've got to do this 
almost all over again." 

        The plan for storing the waste hasn't been submitted to 
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for approval. That process was 
delayed because not all of the scientific documentation - 
including the documents now in question - has been submitted to 
the NRC. 

        The NRC, which has final say on whether the waste site 
opens, is "following certainly with interest what they (the 
Energy Department) are doing," spokeswoman Sue Gagner said. 

        The nuclear industry and the Energy Department expressed 
confidence Wednesday that Yucca will be safe. 

        "We'll just have to see what happens from this point 
forward," said Steve Kerekes, a spokesman for the Nuclear Energy 
Institute, the industry's trade group. "We believe it's been 
shown to be a suitable site." 

        Bodman promised that, regarding Yucca, "all related 
decisions have been, and will continue to be, based on sound 
science." 

        Attorney Geoff Fettus of the Natural Resources Defense 
Council, an environmental group opposed to the Yucca Mountain 
site, said "they need to openly disclose what was falsified, what 
the extent of it was and what they are going to do to solve it." 

        The Energy Department and the USGS promise 
investigations. The USGS hasn't reprimanded or suspended the 
employees who are suspected. 

        Lee said there was still a dire need to do something 
about the millions of pounds of nuclear waste sitting at nuclear 
power plants across the country. 

        Bodman agreed: "The fact remains that this country needs 
a permanent geological nuclear-waste repository, and the 
administration will continue to aggressively pursue that goal. We 
are committed to the safety and protection of the citizens of 
Nevada as we pursue the development of the Yucca Mountain 
project." 


*****************************************************************
 34 Daily Breeze: New claims undermine Utah nuclear waste dump project
 	
Thursday, March 17, 2005                                                                                              
 					   						 					   				 				
Scientific documents on water infiltration issue for proposed 
Yucca Mountain repository may have been falsified, energy 
official says.                                                                                                

By Ken Ritter 

LAS VEGAS -- Foes of a national nuclear waste dump in Nevada
said the project has been crippled by revelations Wednesday that
key scientific documents might have been falsified, and lawyers
for the state pounced on the disclosures as key evidence in the
battle over Yucca Mountain. 

"This strikes at the very heart of the technical dispute between
the state of Nevada and the Energy Department," said Joe Egan, a
Vienna, Va.-based lawyer representing the state in lawsuits
against the federal government's plan to build a nuclear
repository 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. 							

"We have the project's own geologists falsifying documents about
water infiltration," Egan said. "That's the heart of the
dispute. That's what we're preparing to litigate before the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission." 

The state plans to oppose the Energy Department application for
a Nuclear Regulatory Commission operating permit to entomb
77,000 tons of the nation's most radioactive waste beneath an
ancient volcanic ridge in the desert. 

State Attorney General Brian Sandoval called Wednesday for the
government to suspend the plan "consistent with Energy Secretary
Samuel Bodman's statement that he is 'committed to the safety
and protection of the citizens of Nevada.'" 

"In any case, we will demand a thorough and fully independent
investigation," Sandoval said in a statement. 

Reaction was swift in Las Vegas, where longtime nuclear foe Judy
Treichel said she was not surprised, and in Congress, Rep. Jon
Porter, R-Nev., said the halls hummed with word of Bodman's
revelations. 

In Carson City, Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn said he was
"disappointed and outraged." Guinn's veto of President Bush's
selection of the site was overridden by Congress in 2002. 

"DOE's revelation is critical because water is the mechanism
that could corrode the storage containers at Yucca Mountain and
carry radioactive waste into the environment," Guinn said in a
statement. 

But Steve Frishman, a geologist and consultant for Nevada on
technical elements of the project, said he wouldn't pronounce
the plan dead. 

Project planners are "preparing to do the same things they did
when they had quality assurance problems before," Frishman said.
"They go back and do the work under the appropriate quality
assurance or they try to apply quality assurance after-the-fact.
We probably will contest a bunch of it." 

The organizer of a group that began in December to call for
Nevada to seek federal economic benefits in return for accepting
nuclear waste praised Bodman for going public. 

"We applaud the secretary for being up front and honest," said
Chris Barrett, a Reno-based advertising executive heading the
group called "For A Better Nevada." 

Bodman said that during preparation for the license application,
e-mails were discovered from 1998 to 2000 in which a U.S.
Geological Survey employee indicated he had fabricated
documentation relating to computer modeling involving water
infiltration and climate. 

Bodman said the department had begun an investigation of whether
the falsified information would affect the scientific
underpinnings of the project. 

The U.S. Geological Survey, the agency that produced the data,
also was investigating. 

One member of the Nevada congressional delegation said she would
call Thursday for an independent third-party audit of Yucca
Mountain documents and data. 

"I don't think it's appropriate for the Department of Energy to
be the primary investigators of this issue," said Rep. Shelley
Berkley, D-Nev. "I suspect that if they scratch the surface a
little more they will find more evidence of falsifying the
documents and falsifying the science." 

Porter said Congress had been betrayed, and he intended to call
witnesses before his House Federal Workforce and Agency
Organization Subcommittee, which has jurisdiction over federal
employees. 

"This calls into question the whole project," Porter said.
"There's a reason they had to falsify these documents and we're
going to get to the bottom of it." 												 						  					  
					   					 					   				 			

Make DailyBreeze.com your homepage
Š2005 Copley Press, Inc. Content may not be reproduced or
*****************************************************************
 35 ENS: Falsified Yucca Mtn. Documents Bolster Nuclear Dump's Critics

Environment News Service (ENS)

WASHINGTON, DC, March 17, 2005 (ENS) - Government employees
working on the licensing of Yucca Mountain, Nevada as the
nation's only permanent repository for high-level nuclear waste
"may have falsified documentation of their work," the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) acknowledged Wednesday. 

The suspected worker was employed by the US Geological Survey
(USGS) at the Department of the Interior, and the documentation
in question "relates to computer modeling involving water
infiltration and climate," said Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman.
[Bodman] Samuel Bodman heads the U.S. Department of Energy.
(Photo courtesy DOE) During the document review process
associated with the Licensing Support Network preparation for
the Yucca Mountain project, DOE contractors discovered multiple
emails written between May 1998 and March 2000, in which a USGS
employee indicated that he had fabricated documentation of his
work," Bodman said in a statement. 

This documentation is required as part of the Department of
Energy and Nuclear Regulatory Commissions quality assurance
programs that verify the accuracy and credibility of work that
has been completed. 

Describing himself as "greatly disturbed" by the revelation,
Bodman called the alleged fabrication "completely unacceptable."
He has referred the matter to the Department of Energys Office
of Inspector General for full investigation. 

[Yucca] The crest of Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las
Vegas. (Photo courtesy DOE) Yucca Mountain would be nation's
first long-term geologic repository for spent nuclear fuel and
high-level radioactive waste. Currently stored at 126 sites
around the nation, these materials are a result of nuclear power
generation and national defense programs. 

The DOE has informed the U.S, Geological Survey and the State of
Nevada of the alleged falsification. 

Nevada Governor Kenny Guinn, a Republican, said, I am both
disappointed and outraged by this development, but hardly
surprised." 

All along, the State of Nevada has felt it is our duty to hold
the federal government accountable on the proposed Yucca
Mountain nuclear waste dump because we would be storing the
deadliest substance known to man. 

This is yet another example as to why Nevadas Agency for
Nuclear Projects has closely monitored the Yucca Mountain
project since its inception, Guinn said. This comes on the
heels of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington ruling the EPA
radiation protection standard was deficient. 

Because the data in question involved computer modeling for
water infiltration and climate, the sitution is particularly
troubling, Guinn said. 

[Guinn] Nevada Governor Kenny Guinn has opposed the Yucca
Mountain project since its inception. (Photo courtesy Office of
the Governor) DOEs revelation is critical because water is the
mechanism that could corrode the storage containers at Yucca
Mountain and carry radioactive waste into the environment,the
governor said. This is the heart of the matter as to whether
the storage of nuclear waste could be determined to be safe just
90 miles from Nevadas largest city, Las Vegas. 

Guinn supports the Energy Secretary's call for a full
investigation by DOEs Office of Inspector General. 

U.S. Senators from Nevada John Ensign, a Republican, and Harry
Reid, a Democrat seized upon the revelation as vindication for
their longstanding position that Yucca Mountain is based on poor
science and should not be licensed. 

We in Nevada have said for years that the science at Yucca
Mountain is faulty  now it appears the science is fraudulent,"
Ensign said. 

"This latest development provides yet another reason to abandon
the misguided notion of storing high-level nuclear waste in
Nevada and will hopefully encourage an accelerated discussion of
alternatives that are safer and more scientifically sound. " 

[Ensign] Senator John Ensign, a Republican, is opposed to Yucca
Mountain. (Photo courtesy Office of the Senator) "These
revelations will undoubtedly bolster Nevadas legal case against
Yucca Mountain. Senator Reid and I will remain vigilant and
weigh our options for further action, but today it is clear the
Yucca Mountain project continues to crumble before its
supporters eyes, Ensign said. 

This proves once again that DOE must cheat and lie in order to
make Yucca Mountain look safe," said Reid. "We arent just
talking about false documentation on paper, this is about the
health and safety of Nevadans and the American people." 

The Bush administration, which has approved the Yucca Mountain
waste repository, has always insisted that its approval was
based on sound science, a position that Secretary Bodman
repeated Wednesday. 

The safe handling and disposal of nuclear waste and the sound
scientific basis for the repository safety analysis are
priorities for this administration and the Department of Energy.
All related decisions have been, and will continue to be, based
on sound science," Bodman said. 

[Reid] Nevada Senator Harry Reid leads Senate Democrats. (Photo
courtesy Office of the Senator) But Reid was not reassured by
this statement. "It is abundantly clear that there is no such
thing as 'sound science' at Yucca Mountain, and Im disappointed
President [George W. Bush] rushed so quickly to push the project
through and continues to make it a priority. I do not believe
Yucca Mountain will ever open, and Nevada and our nation will be
safer for our successful efforts to stop the project." 

It should be obvious to everyone now that Yucca Mountain isnt
going anywhere," Reid said. 

Both Nevada senators are working together on legislation that
would allow waste to be stored on-site at nuclear facilities. 

"The tide is turning on Yucca Mountain, and its time we look at
this viable alternative and realistic approach to long term
waste storage, said Reid. 

Nevada Congressman Jim Gibbons, a Republican and the sole
geologist in Congress, said was not surprised to learn that
reports about the safety of Yucca Mountain may have been
falsified or fabricated. 

[Gibbons] Congressman Jim Gibbons is an attorney, a geologist
and a fifth term Representative of Nevada. (Photo courtesy
Office of the Congressman) "For over two decades, the Department
of Energy has rushed headlong towards licensing the Yucca
Mountain Project no matter what," said Gibbons. "Todays
allegations are extremely serious and should halt the licensing
process in its tracks." 

The Department of Energy has initiated a scientific
investigation of the data and documentation that was part of
this modeling activity," Bodman said. 

"If in the course of that review any work is found to be
deficient, it will be replaced or supplemented with analysis and
documentation that meets appropriate quality assurance standards
to ensure that the scientific basis of the project is sound,"
Bodman said. "We are conducting a thorough review of all work
completed by the identified individuals to ensure that other
work was not affected." 

[inside] Scientific characterization of Yucca Mountain has been
ongoing since 1978. Here a scientist conducts an analysis of
water movement deep within the mountain where the nuclear waste
would be stored. (Photo courtesy DOE Office of Civilian Waste
Management) Gibbons was not placated by this assurance. "I do
not know how any Nevadan or any American can have confidence in
the DOE in its pursuit to license Yucca Mountain in light of
these recent allegations of false documentation and their
history of changing the rules and standards without any regard
for safety or security," he said. 

"The transportation and storage of high level nuclear waste at
Yucca Mountain has been and always will be an unsafe and
unsuitable proposal that I will continue to fight, said
Gibbons. 

In addition, Bodman said, the DOE has begun an evalution to
determine if the department's quality assurance procedures are
"sufficient to prevent the reoccurrence of a similar situation." 

"We plan to reemphasize to project personnel the importance of
strict adherence to quality assurance procedures," he said. 

The fact remains that this country needs a permanent geological
nuclear waste repository, and the administration will continue
to aggressively pursue that goal," Bodman said. "We are
committed to the safety and protection of the citizens of Nevada
as we pursue the development of the Yucca Mountain project.   

  
                          Quote of Note
   
  "We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity belonging
to us. When we see land as a community to which we belong, we
may begin to use it with love and respect."
 -- Aldo Leopold, American environmentalist and author   

    Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2005. All Rights
*****************************************************************
 36 Daily Yomiuri: Atomic energy panel OK's U.K. proposal for waste exchange 

Tatsuo Nakajima / Yomiuri Shimbun Staff Writer 

The Atomic Energy Commission is recommending agreeing to a
British proposal to exchange Japan's low-level radioactive waste
for high-level nuclear waste in Britain under what is called the
exchange-of-equivalents formula. 

Japan has a nuclear fuel cycle policy in which spent nuclear
fuel is reprocessed to extract plutonium to be reused. 

However, since no reprocessing plants have been built in Japan,
the government has commissioned British and French firms to
reprocess the nation's spent nuclear fuel. 

British Nuclear Fuels PLC (BNFL) processes plutonium and uranium
into fuel at the company's Sellafield site in northwest England,
and then transports the fuel to Japan together with radioactive
waste generated during the reprocessing. 

BNFL proposes that in return for processing the low-level
radioactive waste, Japan should accept high-level radioactive
waste generated in Britain. 

To ensure an exchange of equivalents, the total amount of
radiation of the low-level radioactive waste to be transported
to Japan, and the equivalent radiation of the high-level waste
must be calculated. 

In Japan, radioactive waste is divided into only high and low
categories, while in Britain it is split into low, middle and
high levels. Midlevel radioactive waste contains radioactive
substances regarded as being more difficult to handle than
Japan's low-level radioactive waste. 

The British proposal involves the exchange of the mid- and
high-level radioactive waste. 

Both sides can benefit from the exchange, which should reduce
the frequency and cost of shipping. 

The midlevel radioactive waste to be shipped requires protective
casing consisting of about 4,500 cement blocks, equivalent to
about 2,500 square meters, to contain fuel rods and nuclear
fuel, and about 6,000 cement blocs, equivalent to 9,000 square
meters, to contain garbage, including used gloves. 

It takes 37 trips to ship the waste and fuel to Japan, but it
will take only one trip to transport about 150 solid glass
blocks containing an amount of high-level radioactive waste with
an equivalent radioactivity to the mid-level radioactive waste. 

The voyage takes about two months, and Japan has to negotiate
with countries along the route because of safety concerns. 

If the exchange is carried out, the number of trips will decline
significantly, resulting in a substantial fall in transportation
and security costs, and easing Japan's diplomatic efforts. 

Britain, which still does not have a place for the final
disposal of high-level radioactive waste, said it had no
intention of dumping high-level radioactive waste on Japan, but
150 solid glass blocks only account for a small portion of the
large amount of high-level radioactive waste in Britain. 

Meanwhile, France has shipped 892 solid glass blocs containing
high-level waste to Japan, with another 400 from France and 850
from Britain scheduled to be shipped. 

When a private reprocessing plant in Aomori Prefecture goes into
operation, more solid glass blocks will be produced. With
domestic production up and running, it would not be difficult to
accept high-level waste if a system is in place to evaluate
whether the exchange is equal and safe. 

The Atomic Energy Commission is inclined to accept the exchange,
saying the government should establish such a system as soon as
possible. 

But it is important the government explains the exchange to the
public after studying its pros and cons and weighing the
relevant safety issues.   

Copyright 2005 The Yomiuri Shimbun 
*****************************************************************
 37 chillicothe gazette: Waverly firm takes over plant - 

www.chillicothegazette.com

    Thursday, March 17, 2005   

Waverly firm takes over plant
 Pro2Serve to manage Piketon uranium enrichment facility

 By DANIEL PRAZER Gazette Staff Writer 
  
In other news from the Piketon uranium enrichment plant, USEC
Inc., the company planning to build a next-generation enrichment
facility in Piketon, announced its 2004 earnings Wednesday. 

USEC's 2004 net income was $23.5 million, or 28 cents per share,
as opposed to a $9.8 million income in 2003. 

During the quarter ending Dec. 31, the company brought in a net
of $28.2 million as opposed to a loss of $700,000 during the
last quarter of 2003. 

For more on this, go to www.usec.comand click on "News Room." 

PIKETON -- The Department of Energy has named the contractor who
will be charged with maintaining the infrastructure at the
Piketon uranium enrichment plant. 

Theta Pro2Serve Management Co., headquartered in Waverly, was
awarded a $48.8 million five-year contract that had been set
aside for a small business, it was announced Wednesday. Their
duties will include such tasks as surveillance and maintenance
of some facilities, site security, janitorial services and
property and records management, according to the DOE release. 

Joe Davis, spokesman for the department's Washington, D.C.,
headquarters, did not return several calls, and a representative
from Theta Pro2Serve could not be reached for comment. 

But Dan Minter, president of the local union that represents
plant workers, said some of the contractor's higher-ups have as
much as 25 years of experience at the Piketon plant. 

"A number of people with this group have a local site
background, so these folks who are part of the TPMC group ...
are obviously knowledgeable about the site," Minter said. 

Theta Pro2Serve will take over from Bechtel-Jacobs Co. May 31.
Bechtel-Jacobs, which handles cleanup and maintenance at the
plant, will be helping Theta Pro2Serve transition into its new
role, said Bechtel-Jacobs spokesman Jack Williams. 

"We plan to continue to support the DOE's environmental
management program here until our contract ends," Williams said. 

Bechtel-Jacobs duties at the plant have been split into three
contracts -- handling the thousands of cylinders of leftovers
from enrichment, handling cleanup and managing the
infrastructure. In addition, United States Enrichment Corp.
handles other DOE-related activities on site. 

While he's more confident about the infrastructure contract let
out, Minter said the different contracts may lead to some
confusion. In addition, the DOE management for the site is based
in Lexington, Ky., and also oversees the enrichment plant in
Paducah. 

"We have no site manager for DOE, so lacking that kind of
infrastructure and oversight, having three different contracts
being deployed by the Department of Energy -- without that
integration, it's a bit of a trouble whether or not something
gets missed." 

The department announced the cleanup contract would be awarded
to LATA/Parallax Portsmouth, but that has been delayed, Minter
said, as as many as a dozen bidders have contested the award. 

(Prazer can be reached at 772-9364 or via e-mail at
dprazer@nncogannett.com)

Originally published Thursday, March 17, 2005
 
Copyright Š2004 Chillicothe Gazette. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 38 NC Times: Catastrophe awaits in Utah 

Opinion: Editorials Last modified Wednesday, March 16, 2005
11:32 PM PST 

Catastrophe awaits in Utah
 
By: North County Times - Editorial 

Our View: It is a deal at 10 times the price: Federal officials
say it will take $400 million or so to clean up the 12
million-ton pile of radioactive slag that is leaking poison into
the Colorado River, a key source of drinking water for North
County and millions of fellow residents of the Southwest United
States.

The U.S. government needs to immediately wrap up studies and
move this dire threat safely away from the river. There are few
higher priorities in public policy. 

For five years, Energy Department officials have been studying
the pile, which sits in Moab, Utah, at a hair-raising distance
of just 750 feet from the river. The legacy of a closed uranium
mine that fed the nuclear weapons and power industries, it is
filled with highly radioactive heavy metals such as uranium,
radium and radon, and with poisonous chemicals such as ammonia
and sulfuric acid salts. 

California water officials and the Environmental Protection
Agency say that the toxic pile must be moved. A big flood or a
major earthquake could shove the 130-acre pile into the river
and render its water "unusable," scientists say. In other words,
we face one of the worst environmental and economic catastrophes
in U.S. history.

It is difficult to overstate the importance of the Colorado
River, which provides more than a third of the water used by
Southern California's 18 million people. Relatively small
cutbacks provoke epic political battles; doing without the
river's water entirely would trigger draconian rationing for
residents, and almost certainly destroy the world's
most-lucrative farming region.

Incredibly, Energy Department officials say they still don't
know what to do with the radioactive pile. Options include
burying it and hoping for the best.

For decades, government and industry used the vast expanses of
the West as their cheap dumping grounds for the most dangerous
substances on earth. Now, with local populations booming, their
abandoned wreckage threatens the health of millions. In another
prominent example, federal officials still are dragging their
feet on the cleanup of sites that leak perchlorate, a toxic
rocket fuel, into the Colorado River. Once thought to be
relatively harmless, perchlorate has been found to accumulate in
lettuce and other crops. High exposures cause a raft of health
problems.

For years, the unofficial motto of water officials has been
"dilution is the solution to pollution." With society unwilling
and unable to pay for an infinitely clean environment,
policymakers must rely on imperfect and evolving science to help
them set priorities.

But it's been raining lately. And rivers flood when it rains. We
must remove this potential catastrophe, and fast. 

  webmaster@nctimes.com 
                Š 1997-2005 North
County Times - Lee Enterprises    editor@nctimes.com  
*****************************************************************
 39 Las Vegas RJ: YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Suspicion over data surfaces 
 
Thursday, March 17, 2005
 

Possible falsification lendsmore doubts about project By
SAMANTHA YOUNG 
STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
 
WASHINGTON -- Federal workers might have falsified Yucca
Mountain documents, raising new questions about the science used
by the government to build a nuclear waste repository in Nevada.
 
 The Energy Department said Wednesday that a U.S. Geological
Survey worker had "indicated that he had fabricated
documentation of his work" in e-mails written between May 1998
to 2000.
 
 The revelation sparked several investigations by the
departments of Energy and Interior, including two inspector
general investigations that Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said
would review the scientific data and the paperwork in question.
 
 "We are also beginning a scientific investigation into the
effects of these actions and these individuals, and if we find
any deficiencies, the work will be replaced or supplemented,"
Theodore Garrish, deputy director of the Office of Civilian
Radioactive Waste Management, told the House Appropriations
subcommittee on energy and water.
 
 The Energy Department said the documentation under review
relates to computer modeling involving water infiltration and
climate at Yucca Mountain.
 
 Depending on the extent of the falsification, the project is
certain to suffer delays if not terminate the project
altogether, said Nevada Nuclear Projects Agency chief Bob Loux.
 
 "Absolutely it's a major setback. I think it will preclude them
from submitting a license application in the near term," Loux
said. "This combined with all of the other major issues it seems
to indicate to me there is a level of incompetence and
mismanagement that might not be repairable and could lead to the
demise of the project."
 
 Energy Department officials said they were uncertain whether
the falsification involved quality-assurance documents --
designed to verify the accuracy and credibility of scientific
data -- or the data.
 
 "It looks like a very small number of individuals," said an
Energy official who requested anonymity. "Everybody needs to be
careful about jumping to sweeping conclusions when it could be a
matter that could be resolved quickly."
 
 The damaging e-mails were discovered by Energy Department
contractor Bechtel SAIC, which is independently reviewing the
government's work toward a license application for the
repository from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
 Bechtel brought the e-mails to the Energy Department's
attention Friday, sources said. A Bechtel spokeswoman Wednesday
referred calls to the Energy Department.
 
 An Interior Department official said at least two government
workers were named in the e-mails, and up to 10 individuals
might have had some involvement.
 
 USGS chief Charles Groat said in a statement that "serious
questions have been raised about quality-assurance practices
performed" by his workers. He vowed appropriate actions once the
facts are known.
 
 The Interior Department is conducting its own investigation
separate from the Energy Department.
 
 Nevada lawmakers said any document falsification calls into
question all work involving Yucca Mountain. In the 2000
presidential campaign, Bush vowed that the decision whether to
store nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain would be based on "sound
science."
 
 "The proponents of Yucca Mountain have said this is all based
on sound science, and now it looks like the science may have
been tampered with, at least the results," said Sen. John
Ensign, R-Nev.
 
 Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., repeated his call to move legislation
through Congress allowing for the storage of nuclear waste at
locations where nuclear power is produced. 
"This proves once again that DOE must cheat and lie in order to
make Yucca Mountain look safe," Reid said. "We aren't just
talking about false documentation on paper, this is about the
health and safety of Nevadans and the American people."
 
 Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., who leads a Government Reform panel
overseeing federal employees, said he had scheduled an April 5
hearing in Washington on the matter.
 
 "Decisions have been made by Congress and the federal courts
based on the science," Porter said. "We're going to do whatever
we can to get the facts on the table."
 
 Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said she planned to send a letter
today to Bodman calling for an independent review.
 
 "For the Department of Energy to conduct this investigation is
like the fox watching the hen house," Berkley said. 
Bodman repeated his support of the project, issuing a statement
that the administration would continue to pursue aggressively a
permanent geological nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain.
 
 A spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry group
that backs the project, declined to comment.
 
 "It's too early to speculate," NEI spokesman Steve Kerekes said.
 
 At the House hearing, Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen, R-N.J.,
thanked Garrish for being "up front" about the problem.
 
 "I'm a strong supporter of Yucca Mountain. We don't need any
internal problems to interfere with the work that goes on out
there," Frelinghuysen said.
 
 Committee Chairman Rep. David Hobson, R-Ohio, who supports the
project, did not comment on Garrish's statements.
 
 Steve Frishman, a geologist and full-time consultant to the
state, said the revelations raise questions about the ability of
Yucca Mountain to contain radioactive particles as they travel
in water moving through the mountain.
 
 "This is right at the very heart of DOE's whole case about the
safety of Yucca Mountain," Frishman said. 
He said that expensive work DOE has conducted to produce
computer models for its system performance assessment is in
jeopardy.
 
 "We can't trust anything that comes out of the models. ... The
bottom line is the dose to an individual from the repository,"
Frishman said. 
"If you have no way to trust the water input into the system,
then you have no way to trust the predicted doses that result
from releases from the repository," he said. 
Frishman said the Energy Department will have to reconstruct
quality assurance after the fact or go back and collect more
data, adding costs to the $57.5 billion project. 
DOE officials repeatedly have pushed back the date they expect
to deliver 77,000 tons of spent, commercial reactor fuel and
highly radioactive defense waste to the mountain, 100 miles
northwest of Las Vegas. The repository opening date has slipped
from 2010 to 2012 and most recently 2015. 
The project encountered another stumbling block last year when a
District of Columbia appeals court panel determined the
Environmental Protection Agency's 10,000-year radiation safety
standard did not cover peak dose periods hundreds of thousands
of years into the future as recommended by a National Academy of
Sciences. 
EPA scientists are reconsidering the rule that required the
Energy Department to show that nuclear particles escaping from a
Yucca Mountain repository would not expose an individual to more
than 15 millirems of radiation annually for a period of 10,000
years. 

Stephens Washington Bureau reporter Tony Batt contributed to
this article.
 
 
Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
*****************************************************************
 40 Yucca: PORTER TROUBLED BY LATEST YUCCA NEWS - Will hold hearing

 Congressman Jon Porter (NV03) - Press Release - REPRESENTATIVE
    
March 16, 2005       

      Washington, D.C. - U.S. Representative Jon Porter (R-NV)
issued the following statement upon the allegations that federal
employees have falsified documents related to the Yucca Mountain
project:   I am deeply troubled and disturbed by the
allegations that have been made against employees in the U.S.
Geological Survey.  If true, these charges have wide ranging
implications that can only serve to further jeopardize this
dangerous project.   Undoubtedly, allegations of federal
employees blatantly and purposefully falsifying documentation on
Yucca Mountain will affect nearly every decision that has been
made in the courts and in the U.S. Congress on the development
of this already ill thought-out scheme.  To willfully put the
health and safety of Nevadans and the American people at risk is
the ultimate nuclear scandal.   As the Chairman of the House
Federal Workforce and Agency Organization Subcommittee, I intend
to hold a hearing on April 5 to look into these allegations as
soon as possible to ensure that employees who participated in
such reckless behavior are not widespread at Yucca.   #####
       
*****************************************************************
 41 Bellona: Sellafield status update: Pile 1 decommissioning plans moving
slowly but steadily forward
 
SELLAFIELD, EnglandEarly in World War II, British Prime Minister 
Winston Churchill understood the effect nuclear deterrence could 
have against future wars. But after a short period of nuclear 
collaboration with the United Statesduring which many of 
Englands most vaunted nuclear scientists took part in the 
Manhattan project Washington dried up with the passage of the 
MacMahon atomic energy act in 1946, effectively leaving England 
to develop its own atomic bomb. 

  The Pile 1 reactor at Windscale undergoing dismantlement under
supervision of the UKAEA.   
  Nils Břhmer/Bellona   

Charles Digges, 2005-03-17 13:33

Churchill was nonetheless insistent, and in a furious push
between 1947 and 1950, as a war ravaged England began to
rebuild, a plutonium production reactor called Pile 1 went
online under the guidance of John Cockcroft, head engineer at
the Windscale facilitylater renamed Sellafieldin Northwest
England on the Irish sea near the town of Seascale. A year
later, Pile 2 went into commission. 

Both reactors were roughly based on the design of the United
States Hanford facilitythe design of which Britains scientists
had a passing acquaintance withwhich produced the material for
the US atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

  The US Department of Energy's Hanford facility where material
for the US atomic bombs dropped on Japan was produced.   
  US DOE   

The term pile came form the fact that Pile 1, like the Hanford
reactor, were built on a scheme wherein graphite moderators and
fuel elements were inserted horizontally rather than vertically,
forming a stack or a pile. Vertical insertion is the most common
reactor design today. 

The main disadvantage to the pile method, as opposed to the
vertical standard, is that control rods that govern nuclear
reactions are far harder to manipulate. Thus technical response
time in the event of an impending accident is lengthened. 

Beginnings of decommissioning 
Pile 1 is proving harder to take down than to put up. It was
shutdown after a fire October 10th 1957. Immediately following,
its twin, Pile 2, was shut down as well. 

Pile 1 is one of the most contentious decommissioning issues in
the UK, said Felicity Wilson of the UKAEA, Britains nuclear
environmental clean-up body, which is supervising the
decommissioning work on the Piles. 

Essentially, decommissioning work has been underway in fits and
starts at Pile 1 for the past 48 years. In the three years
following the fire, the air-cooled reactors air and exhaust
ducts were closed, all apertures in the charge face, into which
fuel was inserted, were sealed, peripheral equipment was
removed, and the reactor was put in a monitoring and
surveillance mode until the mid 1980s. 

Phase one 
At that time, phase one of decommissioning Pile 1 one began and
was completed in the early 1990s. The main goals of phase one
were to seal the bio-shield around the reactor, close off
contaminated air and exhaust ducts, and seal off the water ducts
that took discharged fuel elements via a canal system to
Sellafields B29 storage pond. 

B29, a 57-year-old wet storage pond, and the neighbouring
45-year-old B30 redundant Magnox storage and decanning facility,
are contaminated with what is now essentially radioactive
sludge, in the words of British Nuclear Group employees is
currently undergoing large-scale decontamination efforts.

  EC: Sellafield must clean up nuclear waste pond   
  
  A forty-year-old radioactive waste storage pond at Britains
Sellafield nuclear power installationwhose waste content is
unknownhas become the centre of a European Commission, or EC,
intervention that has requested British authorities to develop a
plan to dismantle the aged storage pond by May, 2003.
   
Before 1950, this was a military site, so the records are
incomplete, the British Nuclear Groups information officer
Stephen Stagg said in an interview with Bellona Web. After
that, the inventory process improved so we have a very clear
idea of what is there. But you can see why we have to move
carefully on this. 

Seagulls, meanwhile, wheel overhead and often swim in the
contaminated waters of B29 and the contentious B30. The dead sea
foul are collected by workers and buried on the Sellafield site. 

The seagulls are a big problem for us, so we have population
controls on a regular basis and make sure contaminated birds
dont leave the site, said Stagg. 

The pool cannot simply be drained, as the water holds in
radioactive releases from the sludge. Underwater robotic
technologies are being applied, with an eye toward removing the
sludge and putting it in container flasks, and decontaminating
the walls of the canal. 

Phase 2
 The second phase of decommissioning Pile 1, scheduled to be
complete by 2012, involves complete dismantlement of Pile 1s
150-meter-high reactor core with complete removal of graphite
moderators and most plant structures. It will also involve waste
processing, packaging and consignment, and building a temporary
storage facility for the ensuing high level waste until a plan
for permanent internment is developed. 

Intermediate level waste will stored on site in a new facility
built for that purpose. The reactors bio-shield will be place
in a passive condition. It will then be possible to remove
remaining structures from the site. Indeed, the towering chimney
to Pile 2Pile 1s twinis no longer a part of the Sellafield
skyline. 

Between 1993 and 1995, UKAEA studied four possible tender to
realise these plans. Four emerged at leading candidates:
dismantling it underwater; dismantling it in an interted or
partially-inerted atmosphere, or frosting it. 

No clear plan emerged from these discussions, so British nuclear
authorities adopted a so-called turn key approach that will
involve the three main bidders: British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL),
Nukem, and Rolls Royce nuclear division, with BNFL responsible
for bids and fixed pricing. 

Bellona will continue to monitor the UKAEAs progress as it
develops the decommissioning plans for Pile 1. Indeed, by the
account of workers, it is a plan dictated mostly by trial and
error.

  Bellona's Nils Břhmer and Charles Digges at the Pile 1
facility.   

  Felicity Wislon/UKAEA   

The 1957 fire and possible reasons behind it 
Because of the graphite composition of Pile 1s charge facethe
insertion point for fuel elementsit was susceptible to
something called the Wigner Effect, wherein the constant
bombardment by neutrons builds up potential energy in the form
of heat before being released, thus posing a fire hazard within
the graphite. 

To reduce deleterious effects of this, which included distortion
of the graphite face that made fuel charging and discharging
more difficult, Pile 1 underwent regular processes during which
thermal energy was released by gradually heating the graphite
above normal operating temperature, a process called annealing. 

Annealing had been performed 8 times on Pile 1 between 1952 and
1957, but was becoming increasingly more difficult and often had
to be augmented by additional heat bursts. On October 8th 1957,
Pile 1 was shut down, as per routine for its ninth annealing
procedure. Unusually high temperatures were recorded in the
process, and when technicians examined the phenomenon by
removing the access hole to the core, it was discovered the Pile
was completely ablaze before a single alarm sounded. 

A bulk injection of carbon dioxide failed to extinguish the
fire. Technicians scrambled to withdraw the fuel elements, but
removing 72,000 fuel elements from 3880 channels was taking more
time than they had. It remained burning within the bio-shield of
the reactor for two days until an infusion of water and a
shutting off the air ducts on October 10th finally starved the
fire of oxygen. 

In the aftermath, it was determined that over 20 percent of the
reactor core was damaged in the fire. But with the building of
the Calder Hall plutonium production facility, nuclear
authorities saw little benefit in trying to repair the damage
done to pile one. 

The precise cause of the fire has never been determined, but it
has been voiced by several experts that human error lay at its
base. UKAEA officials told Bellona Web that the annealing
process was carried out too rapidly, thus setting the blaze. In
addition, according to Bellona investigations, safety
regulations that governed the annealing process were ad-hoc and
incomplete, which only made matters worse. 

Pile 1 building manager Carl Nyerscough told Bellona Web during
a visit to the facility last week that a large degree of the
human factor was involved. 

There were likely some basic misunderstandings of the
technology involved which might not have occurred if they had
known more about how the Americans were doing it at Hanford, he
said. This was made impossible after the passage of the MacMahon
act in 1946. 

Standing atop the bio-shield of Pile 1, Nyerscough pointed to
several man-hole type shaft covers down which fire fighting
equipment can be lowered into the reactor should a fire begin in
the affected area of the reactor from which damaged uranium fuel
elements have not entirely been removed. He also pointed out
fire fighting equipment located atop the pile. 

This is basically pro forma stuff that you will in any nuclear
installation, he said, and estimated that chances of a new fire
within Pile 1 at zero. 

Radioactive releases resulting from the fire 
The fire led to two major releases of radioactivity to the air.
The first large release occurred when the natural uranium inside
the reactor core caught fire. The second occurred when the
reactor was finally showered with water and the air ducts
closed. 

A huge cloud of steam transported radioactive particles and
gases up into the air. The radioactive cloud drifted southward
with the prevailing winds over most of England and continued
into Europe, a Bellona investigation published in its 2003
Sellafield report says.

  Bellona's Sellafield Report   

  Read Bellona's comprehensive 2003 report on the Sellafield
site in PDF format.
   
Fifty-four Workers at the Sellafield facility itself were
exposed to radiation doses 150 times higher than the prescribed
dose limit, while many who lived nearby were exposed to
radiation doses 10 times higher than the maximum lifetime doses. 

Though UKAEA knew about the high radiation levels, it was
nevertheless decided not to evacuate the population, the Bellona
report says. 

The fire also had devastating consequences on local milk
production in Cumbria area. The day after the fire, the
authorities halted the distribution of milk from 17 farms in the
district, and on October 12, 1957 the Medical Research Council
ruled that milk containing more than 3,700 Bq of radioactive
iodine-137 per litre should not be consumed. It was assumed that
this limit would affect all milk production in an area of
approximately 500 square kilometres; consequently, all milk from
this entire area was recalled, the Bellona report says. 

The measure was hardly taken in vain: The activity measured in
one of the milk samples was as high as 50 000 Bq per litre,
coming from a farm located 15 kilometres away from Pile 1,
according to Bellonas findings. 

Three days after the initial recall of milk produced in the most
exposed area went into effect it was discovered that some milk
produced further away was contaminated with iodine-137. Milk
samples taken from a farm in Grasmere in the Lake District
showed concentrations of between 4 400 Bq per litre and 6 600 Bq
per litre. 

Despite these discoveries, the milk was nevertheless distributed
to the market.The papers documenting these figures were
classified by the government so as to avoid "unnecessarily
alarming" the population, the Bellona investigation revealed. 

The majority of the restrictions on milk distribution were
lifted on November 4th 1957, while the remaining restrictions
were cancelled on November 23rd, only about a month after the
accident. In all, about two million litres of milk containing
iodine-131 were dumped into the ocean or nearby rivers,
Bellonas report says. 

Efforts have been made to estimate the extent of the radioactive
releases. It is believed that the accident led to a release of
between 600 and 1,000 TBq of iodine-131, between 444 and 596 TBq
of tellurium-132, between 2.2 and 45.5 TBq of caesium-137 and
about 0.2 TBq of strontium-90. 

The British Prime Minister at the time, Harold MacMillan,
suppressed all technical information concerning the accident. He
feared that the conclusions of the accident reportthat the
accident occurred as a consequence of operator negligence and
poor instrumentation, as well as the accident report's reference
to an earlier accident in 1952would adversely affect the
populations confidence in the nuclear energy programme,
postponing the development of British nuclear weapons. 

Macmillan declared that complete openness about the accident
would jeopardise national security, Bellonas report revealed. 

It was 25 years before official estimates of the accident's
effects on the health of local inhabitants were made public. In
1982, the British National Radiological Protection
 Board issued a report describing the full truth about the
Windscale accident. It was estimated that 32 deaths and at least
260 cases of cancer could be attributed to the fire. However,
independent experts maintain that the fire actually led to over
a thousand deaths. 

Safety culture today 

Sellafield is standing down from its Cold War footing, and is
rapidly tranforming into a series of decommissioning projects. 

British Nuclear Group, which was established in response to the
creation of the the Department of Trade and Industry's Nuclear
Decommissioning Authority (NDA) following the Energy Act of
2004, will be the management and operations contractor on the
Sellafeild licenced site. NDA will take ownership of the
Sellafield site on Arpil 1st of this year. As such it is hard to
imagine such MacMillan-scale cover-ups occurring again. 

The NDA will hold tenders among global heavyweights like
Bechtel, Cogema and British Nuclear Group to continue
decommissioning work at Sellafield. 

British Nuclear Groups information officer Stagg speculated
that by 2008, companies like these will be included in the
bidding process, but that whether they will work onsite at
Sellafield will be left to the discretion of the NDA. 

This could imply management changes at the top, but on the
ground, employees view the coming of the NDA as something more
cosmetic than ground shifting. 

We expect some lay-offs, sure, said on worker who asked that
his name not be used. 

But Sellafield is our local business and people around here
just call it the factory. Its hard to imagine a total
overhaul of the workforce especially when so many of us have
this place as the family trade.   

  Publisher: , President: 
Information: , Technical contact: 
Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62  * P.O.Box
2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway
*****************************************************************
 42 Las Vegas SUN: U.S. Geological Survey has history of problems at Yucca
 
By Mary Manning <manning@lasvegassun.com> LAS VEGAS SUN

 As word came that government documents may have been falsified
relating to the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste project, Nevada
officials and scientists recalled similar problems plaguing the
repository effort for years.

 "How many times have we actually told them the books were
cooked?" said Bob Loux, Nevada state Nuclear Projects Agency
director.

 Energy Department lawyers, preparing for a license application
to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, discovered a number of
e-mails from 1998 through 2000 in which an employee of the U.S.
Geological Survey "indicated that he had fabricated
documentation of his work," a congressional committee learned
Wednesday.

 Robert Craig, the U.S. Geological Survey representative in Las
Vegas for Yucca Mountain, said that beyond the sender and
receiver of the e-mails received by the congressional committee,
"a few went to other people."

 The USGS employees' identities are being kept confidential
while an investigation gets under way, Craig said.

 "Credibility is suspect," he said. "Obviously, it's a very
serious matter."

 The discovery strikes at the heart of the state's argument
against building a repository at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles
northwest of Las Vegas, because of unanswered questions about
how fast water flows through the mountain and how quickly the
climate could shift, Loux said.

 "This one may be the one that pushes it over the edge," said
Loux, a repository foe, recalling criticism leveled against the
Yucca Mountain project by the General Accounting Office and the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the 1980s.

 Former Nuclear Regulatory Commission on-site representative
Bill Belke, learning about the fabrication allegations, said,
"Wow. That's a shock."

 Belke said that if Yucca Mountain were a nuclear reactor, the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission would bring criminal charges
against it for falsifying data. The NRC has no authority over
Yucca at this time because there is no license before the
commission.

 "In any industry, that's a criminal act, falsifying documents,"
Belke said.

 "It's up to the DOE (Department of Energy) to prosecute it."

 In all his years working in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's
office overseeing Yucca Mountain, Belke said he never found any
falsified data. He's been retired for four years. Some Energy
Department data were questioned for not being verified or
validated under Belke's watch, but "those are two different
things" in gravity, he said.

 If the Energy Department can prove it was an isolated case, the
project may survive intact. "If it's widespread, however, it
could be real trouble for the Energy Department," Belke said.

 "I'm shocked at this one," Belke said. "There's been one
screw-up after another. Enough is enough."

 Hydrologist Linda Lehman, a former consultant to the state for
21 years, said that she doesn't know whether the latest
revelation will halt the repository, but it hurts support for
the project.

 "In court, it certainly hurts their credibility," Lehman said.

 In 1986 the U.S. Geological Survey issued a stop-work order at
Yucca because its scientists could not provide quality assurance
for their work. Quality assurance sets procedures in place
designed to prevent mistakes and oversights during scientific
investigations.

 At that time, one scientist had requested a specific core
sample, but the Energy Department could not assure the sample.
Core samples had been "thrown in the back of a truck and bounced
all over," Loux said at the time.

 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission also shut down the U.S.
Geological Survey's core library in 1988 until it could assure
accuracy in soil cores collected from the mountain.

 In September 1988 the General Accounting Office issued a report
that urged the Energy Department to stop work at Yucca Mountain
once again because its quality assurance program had not been
proven.

 Also in September 1988 a group of 17 young U.S. Geological
Survey scientists spoke out about how the Energy Department
ignored essential scientific studies.

 The scientists blamed a lack of autonomy for their ability to
conduct scientific work at the site. They compared the
repository study to the space shuttle Challenger disaster that
killed seven astronauts.

 "We may succeed in making the program comply with regulations,
while being scientifically indefensible," they wrote.

 The hydrologists complained that the Yucca program was
top-heavy with managers. 


 
*****************************************************************
 43 Las Vegas SUN: Panel reiterates chances slim of volcano affecting Yucca
 
By Benjamin Grove <grove@lasvegassun.com> SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU

 WASHINGTON -- A Yucca Mountain oversight panel on Wednesday
reiterated that the chances of a volcano disturbing the planned
underground repository were tiny.

 But the panel also cited a lack of scientific understanding
about the effects of "igneous activity" at Yucca Mountain.

 There are no clearly defined, long-term predictors of volcanic
activity at Yucca Mountain, said William Hinze, a geophysicist
and professor emeritus at Purdue University, and a member of a
scientific panel of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that
advises the five-member commission on Yucca issues.

 But most "scientifically acceptable" estimates predict that the
chances of volcanic activity at Yucca are between 1 in 10
million and 1 in 100 million each year for the first 10,000
years of the repository, Hinze said.

 "The chances are very, very, very small, but that doesn't mean
we shouldn't understand, through comprehensive study, this
issue," Hinze said after a regular commission briefing today.

 Yucca Mountain critics generally agree with Energy Department
officials who say a volcano is highly unlikely at Yucca, but
they point to holes in department studies and findings. Those
studies are part of the 20 years of research compiled by the
department for an application for a license to construct Yucca.
The department plans to submit the application to the NRC late
this year.

 The department aims to prove in the application that its
research is sound and that Yucca is a safe place to construct a
national high-level radioactive waste repository.

 Hinze noted that small volcanos have occurred in the Yucca area
over the past several million years. He said "important
uncertainties remain" about the potential effects of volcanic
activity on the repository and that more and better research is
needed.

 Scientists have had difficulty understanding how magma might
behave in the tunnels of the repository, Hinze said. That makes
it hard for scientists to know how magma would affect the
high-tech metal waste containers stored in the tunnels.

 Hinze said more realistic models were needed to demonstrate to
the NRC just how magma would flow, and to demonstrate how
contaminated ash and dust could be dispersed into the
environment.

 The panel plans to keep tabs on the issue for the NRC by
reviewing the work of the San Antonio-based Center for Nuclear
Waste Regulatory Analysis, which is conducting Yucca research
for the NRC in preparation for the agency's review of the Yucca
license application. The panel also may establish a working
group of its own to study the issue.

 
 
*****************************************************************
 44 Las Vegas SUN: Yucca data allegedly falsified

Today: March 17, 2005 at 11:08:30 PST 

Energy Secretary Bodman is 'greatly disturbed' by situation

 By Benjamin Grove <grove@lasvegassun.com> SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU 
CHIEF

 WASHINGTON -- Employees of the U.S. Geological Survey who were
revisiting scientific study on the key issue of water flow at
Yucca Mountain allegedly falsified research documents, an Energy
Department review of employee e-mails revealed.

 Department officials discovered the e-mails as part of a
massive review of millions of program document pages in
preparation for submitting an application for a license to
construct Yucca.

 "Multiple" e-mails written between May 1998 and March 2000
indicate that a U.S. Geological Survey employee fabricated
documentation of his work, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said
Wednesday.

 The revelation, which triggered two major investigations, is a
devastating blow to the Yucca program aimed at establishing a
national nuclear waste repository at the desert site, Yucca
critics said. It supports the state's primary scientific
argument against Yucca -- that the repository could not safely
isolate radioactive waste from the environment, largely because
of water flow, Nevada officials said.

 "This is enormous because it is literally the main artery of
the state's dispute with the DOE's assertion that the repository
can contain nuclear waste for a long period of time," said Joe
Egan, a lawyer leading Nevada's court challenges against Yucca.
"What we have here is an indication that their own data is
wrong. I don't know how it can get much worse for DOE."

 The documentation was part of Yucca's "quality assurance"
program designed to assure the accuracy of Yucca research. The
documents in question involve computer models of climate and
water infiltration at Yucca, according to the Energy Department.

 The Energy Department found out about the falsifications on
Friday, a department spokesperson said. The department on Monday
notified the Interior Department, the parent agency of U.S.
Geological Survey, an Interior spokesperson said.

 Energy and Interior officials declined to comment on how big a
setback the false documents could be for Yucca, or on the
reactions of Yucca critics.

 But early evidence indicates that the problem was related
solely to documenting scientific work, not to the work itself,
an Interior Department source said.

 It appears that there were two primary people involved in the
e-mailing, but an unknown number of others received the e-mails,
the source said. It is not clear to what extent managers knew
about the e-mails, the source said.

 The two employees are still working for the U.S. Geological
Survey and were still on the job Wednesday, an Interior
spokesperson said. It is not known if several newly launched
investigations will result in disciplinary action for anyone
involved, the spokesperson said.

 Bodman called the falsification "completely unacceptable" and
directed the department's inspector general to investigate. The
department has already begun reviewing data and documentation
related to the computer modeling, Bodman said. If that data is
found to be flawed it will be replaced or supplemented with
analysis that meets quality assurance standards, Bodman said.

 "We are conducting a thorough review of all work completed by
the identified individuals to ensure that other work was not
affected," Bodman said in a written statement.

 Bodman said he was "greatly disturbed" by the situation.

 "The safe handling and disposal of nuclear waste and the sound
scientific basis for the repository safety analysis are
priorities for this administration and the Department of
Energy," Bodman said. "All related decisions have been, and will
continue to be, based on sound science."

 Acting Energy Department Yucca director Theodore Garrish
mentioned the allegations briefly at a House subcommittee
hearing on the Yucca budget, but declined further comment.
Garrish said the fact the department disclosed the issue showed
its "commitment to doing the job right."

 The department issued a news release Wednesday saying it told
the Interior Department that the e-mails raise "serious
questions" about the Yucca document review process.

 U.S. Geological Survey officials said the agency had launched
its own internal investigation and also had handed the matter to
its own inspector general for action.

 "Once the facts are known, appropriate actions will be taken,"
USGS Director Chip Groat said in a written statement. "USGS
remains committed to maintaining scientific excellence."

 The news brought quick rebuke from Yucca critics, who have long
suspected there has been an inter-agency coordinated effort to
skew data to present Yucca in a favorable light.

 "There has always been this tension in the system for the
Department of Energy to get the results it thinks is necessary,"
said Bob Loux, director of the Nevada Nuclear Projects Agency
and the state's top Yucca watchdog.

 Yucca critics said the news seemed to strike a blow to two
important facets of the planned repository: water infiltration
research and overall program quality assurance.

 The issue of water flow into and out of the repository is key
to how well the repository will ultimately isolate the highly
radioactive waste stored permanently inside. Critics say water
could be the most likely pathway for radiation to ultimately
escape the repository.

 "This is a foundation of the project, and it's all based on a
lie, potentially," said Michele Boyd, an analyst with the
watchdog group Public Citizen, which tracks Yucca Mountain.

 Yucca critics, including Nevada officials and their scientists,
have long been at odds with Energy Department Yucca managers
over the issue of water, and how water would interact with the
metal waste containers stored in Yucca tunnels. Nevada officials
say water could seep into the mountain and that water would
speed corrosion of the containers, perhaps within 100 years.

 "This is the heart of the matter as to whether the storage of
nuclear waste could be determined to be safe just 90 miles from
Nevada's largest city, Las Vegas," Gov. Kenny Guinn said. Guinn
said he was disappointed and outraged, "but hardly surprised."

 Energy Department and nuclear industry officials say water
won't travel into the repository to the extent Nevada officials
argue, and that the containers won't corrode.

 In November 1998 anti-Yucca groups petitioned the Energy
Department to disqualify Yucca based on evidence that water
moved relatively quickly through the repository, in violation of
department "site suitability guidelines."

 The groups noted that in 1996 and 1997 the department had
discovered the radioactive isotope chlorine-36 at unnaturally
high levels deep inside Yucca. The groups said that could only
come from nuclear bomb blasts in the South Pacific in the 1950s
and had traveled inside the mountain via rain in less than 50
years. The department essentially scrapped its suitability
guideline, said Kevin Kamps, waste specialist with Nuclear
Information and Resource Service.

 "If you can't meet the standard, just eliminate the standard,"
Kamps said.

 The quality assurance program is designed to verify that Yucca
research -- and the documentation and evidence that supports the
research -- is in proper order. The quality assurance, or "QA,"
program is important because the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
charged with licensing and regulating Yucca, will carefully
review the quality assurance work at Yucca to determine if the
Energy Department has properly verified its conclusion that
Yucca is safe.

 The Yucca quality assurance program has previously come under
fire from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the General
Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress. Energy
Department officials say improvements have been made.

 "This is just a big, important example of how they have kept
track of data," Boyd said. "It shows just how badly their
program has been managed."

 The revelation Wednesday stirs new suspicion about the QA
program, Yucca critics said.

 "All of the scientific studies and documentation related to
Yucca Mountain now must be questioned and re-evaluated," Rep.
Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., said.

 Nevada lawmakers in Congress who have long sought to kill the
Yucca program said the new allegations were highly damaging.
News of it was spreading quickly Wednesday on Capitol Hill, Rep.
Jon Porter, R-Nev., said.

 "I was hearing about it in every corner," Porter said. "One can
assume that the Department of Energy falsified documents because
they needed to. This calls into question the whole project."

 Porter, chairman of the House subcommittee on federal workforce
and agency organization, said he planned to hold a panel hearing
April 5 to examine the allegations.

 House Appropriations energy and water development subcommittee
Chairman David Hobson, R-Ohio, a leading Yucca advocate in the
House, said he did not think the issue was a "major impediment"
and "could be corrected very easily."

 "It's not going to be a 'in the heart' type of thing," Hobson
said Wednesday after a Yucca budget hearing. "It's unfortunate
and shouldn't have happened ... It's just sloppy work."

 But Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Wednesday's
news represented evidence that the Energy Department "lies" to
make Yucca look safe.

 "It is abundantly clear that there is no such thing as 'sound
science' at Yucca Mountain, and I'm disappointed President Bush
rushed so quickly to push the project through and continues to
make it a priority," Reid said.

 Reid said Yucca has suffered a number of setbacks and
re-iterated his stance that Yucca would never open. Reid and
Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., intend to push legislation calling on
the Energy Department to manage waste as it sits on-site at
nuclear power plants -- not at Yucca.

 "The tide is turning on Yucca Mountain," Reid said.

 Ensign said he spoke to a former Energy Department
undersecretary on Wednesday who said the news was "very serious"
for Yucca. Ensign said Yucca seems to be continuing to
"crumble." The alleged falsifications could boost the state's
legal case that Yucca can't meet radiation safety standards
recommended by the National Academy of Sciences, Ensign said.

 Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said she appreciated Bodman
disclosing the information, but intends to ask for an
independent panel review.

 "If they continue to scratch the surface they will find more
than a few memos," Berkley said.

 In his written statement, Bodman added that the Bush
administration will continue to "aggressively" continue its
effort to establish the repository.

 "We are committed to the safety and protection of the citizens
of Nevada as we pursue the development of the Yucca Mountain
project," Bodman said.

 
 
*****************************************************************
 45 Platts: USGS employees say Yucca Mt. project procedures were violated
 
[The McGraw-Hill Companies]   

 
+ "Serious questions" have been raised about possible quality
assurance (QA) improprieties by a handful of U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) employees working on the DOE repository project
between 1988 and 2000, USGS Director Chip Groat said today. The
alleged improprieties involved procedural violations related to
computer modeling involving water infiltration and climate at
the proposed repository site at Yucca Mountain, Nev. One
violation, a DOE official said today, involved a USGS employee's
failure to properly document what computer software was being
used. All of the alleged improprieties were software-related,
the official said. Whether such QA violations could affect the
validity of the DOE data has yet to be determined, he added.
Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said in a press statement today
that any work found to be deficient would be replaced or
supplemented with work that meets QA requirements. At USGS,
Groat said the issue has been referred to the Inspector General
and that an internal review of the allegations has been
initiated. 

Washington (Platts)--16Mar2005
 
Copyright Š 2005 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
 [The McGraw-Hill Companies]       
*****************************************************************
 46 RGJ: Yucca papers falsified, DOE says
 
+ [Reno Gazette-Journal]  [Reno Gazette-Journal]  March 17, 2005
Reno, Nevada, USA  775-788-6200   [ BORDER=]   	News
 			 		 	
3/16/2005 11:50 pm 

WASHINGTON  A government scientist falsified documents related
to the Yucca Mountain project, the Department of Energy said
Wednesday, further jeopardizing the proposed high-level nuclear
waste repository slated for Southern Nevada.

A U.S. Geological Survey employee indicated in an e-mail that he
fabricated documentation related to computer modeling of water
infiltration into Yucca Mountain, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman
said. The e-mail was caught during a review as the Energy
Department prepared its license application before the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, he said.

I am greatly disturbed by the possibility that any of the work
related to the Yucca Mountain project may have been falsified,
Bodman said. We are conducting a thorough review of all work
completed by the individuals to ensure that other work was not
affected.

Bodman said the Energy Department would continue to pursue the
Yucca Mountain project. 

The falsified documents are only the latest setback for Yucca
Mountain, the proposed nuclear waste dump 90 miles northwest of
Las Vegas that was supposed to open in 2010. Other problems
include:

* The Energy Department admitting last month that the project
was two years behind schedule.

* Margaret Chu, who heads the Energy Department agency that
oversees Yucca Mountain, resigning unexpectedly in February.

* Nevada lawmakers slicing the projects budget last year to
$577 million from the $880 million sought by the Bush
administration.

* A federal appeals court ruling last summer that a new
radiation safety standard must be set before the Energy
Department could file its application with the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission. The Environmental Protection Agency has
yet to set that new standard.

This, on top of all of the other things that have been
happening at the project, really leads us to believe that Yucca
Mountain is really doomed, said Bob Loux, who heads Nevadas
Agency for Nuclear Projects, which is fighting Yucca Mountain.

The geology issue cuts to the heart of Nevadas objection to the
Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump. State officials say water
would infiltrate Yucca Mountain, rust the nuclear waste casks
and leak radiation into area drinking water.

Lawyers working for the Energy Department discovered e-mails
that mentioned falsified documents. According to a spokeswoman
for the U.S. Geological Survey, as many as 20 e-mails discussing
the falsification were sent among several USGS employees.

What we dont know was whether (the document falsification)
impacted the science, said spokeswoman A.B. Wade.

The USGS employees are still on the job while the allegations
are investigated, Wade said.

Both the Energy Department and USGS have referred the matter to
separate inspectors general offices.

Nevada officials were quick to blast the Energy Department.

Todays allegations are extremely serious and should halt the
licensing process in its tracks, said U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons,
R-Reno, who also is a geologist. For over two decades, the
Department of Energy has rushed headlong toward licensing the
Yucca Mountain project no matter what.

It should be obvious to everyone now that Yucca Mountain isnt
going anywhere, said U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. It is
abundantly clear that there is no such thing as sound science
at Yucca Mountain, and Im disappointed President Bush rushed so
quickly to push the project through and continues to make it a
priority.

But the Energy Department said it is not giving up on Yucca
Mountain.

The fact remains that this country needs a permanent geological
nuclear waste repository and the administration will continue to
aggressively pursue that goal, Bodman said. We are committed
to the safety and protection of the citizens of Nevada as we
pursue the development of the Yucca Mountain project. 

Š Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a
*****************************************************************
 47 Salt Lake Tribune: Wait on N-waste plan, panel is asked 

Article Last Updated: 03/16/2005 01:39:25 AM 

Utah officials say the Skull Valley repository plan needs to be 
reviewed, due to years of changes 

By Patty Henetz The Salt Lake Tribune 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission shouldn't immediately 
license a facility to store highly radioactive waste on the 
Skull Valley Goshute reservation because years of piecemeal 
decisions have changed the proposal and left too many 
significant issues unresolved. 

So says the state of Utah in its appeal of a February ruling 
by the Atomic Safety Licencing Board, a panel of NRC judges who 
gave preliminary approval for a utility consortium's license to 
build a spent nuclear fuel storage facility 45 miles southwest 
of Salt Lake City. 

But the consortium, Private Fuel Storage, says the commission 
shouldn't delay licensing the PFS facility because it routinely 
approves similar dry-cask storage proposals for nuclear 
reactors. 

The state's arguments, filed Monday with the NRC, were the 
latest salvos in its nearly eight-year battle with PFS. The 
state contends that because the PFS license application hasn't 
been updated since November 2001, it doesn't include 
consideration of such issues as seismic safety, transportation 
difficulties or security. 

"The state of the record is so outdated it's like we've got 
a different facility from what was [originally] proposed," said 
Utah Assistant Attorney General Denise Chancellor. 

PFS, however, said delaying the license "would cause 
unwarranted harm to PFS, owners of nuclear power plants who need 
to store spent fuel, the Skull Valley Band of Goshutes and 
Tooele County." 

PFS also argued that receiving its license immediately would 
not pose risk to public health and safety of the environment, 
nor would it affect any future appeals of the license. 

NRC Chairman Nils A. Diaz seemingly bolstered that argument 
Monday when he told the National Press Club that the casks in 
which the spent fuel would be stored were well-protected and even
if they were breached in some type of an attack, radiation 
leakage would be confined to a two-mile radius. 

For the PFS proposal, that radius would include the tiny 
Goshute village, the home of about 25 tribal members, some of 
them children. 

The $3.1 billion interim facility in Skull Valley was 
designed to complement the permanent spent nuclear fuel 
repository proposed for Yucca Mountain, Nev. The Utah facility 
could begin accepting shipments as early as 2007. 

Goshute representatives, through their attorney, expressed 
support for the PFS license. On the other side, the Washington, 
D.C.-based Nuclear Information and Resource Service on Monday 
presented to the NRC anti-PFS petitions signed by about 6,600 
individuals representing nearly 250 local, state, national and 
international organizations, including 19 American Indian 
groups. 

--- 

The Associated Press contributed to this story. 

ÂŠ Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. 
*****************************************************************
 48 Salt Lake Tribune: Alleged lies may kill Yucca 

Article Last Updated: 03/17/2005 01:58:05 AM 

Nevada N-site fiasco voids Goshute plan, critics say 

By Robert Gehrke The Salt Lake Tribune 

Tracks lead to the entrance of Yucca Mountain, the planned 
site of a national nuclear waste dump near Mercury, Nev. 
Government employees may have falsified documents related to the 
nuclear waste project, the Energy Department revealed Wednesday 
(Associated Press file photo) 

WASHINGTON - Scientists studying Yucca Mountain's suitability as 
a permanent nuclear waste repository may have falsified 
documents, raising a new challenge for the much-delayed project 
and questions about whether it could affect proposed temporary 
storage in Utah. 

Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said Wednesday that Energy 
Department contractors discovered e-mails, written between 1998 
and 2000, in which an employee with the U.S. Geological Survey 
"indicated he had fabricated documentation of his work." 

Bodman said the department is investigating the data and 
documentation and, if it is found to be flawed, it will be 
redone or supplemented. Other work by the scientists in question 
is also being reviewed. 

"I am greatly disturbed by the possibility that any of the 
work related to the Yucca Mountain Project may have been 
falsified," Bodman said. "This behavior indicated in the e-mails 
is completely unacceptable, and I have referred this matter to 
the Department of Energy's Office of Inspector General for full 
investigation." 

The Energy Department official in charge of the Yucca program 
told a House committee Wednesday that the issue with the 
documents would, at the least, delay the project. 

"I assure you we will not proceed until we have rectified 
these problems,'' Theodore Garrish told the House Appropriations 
subcommittee, according to The Associated Press. 

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said this delay 
and earlier problems with Yucca Mountain should make it apparent 
that the planned facility will never happen and it is time to 
look at alternatives. 

"This proves once again that DOE must cheat and lie in order 
to make Yucca Mountain look safe," Reid said. "We aren't just 
talking about false documentation on paper, this is about the 
health and safety of Nevadans and the American people." 

The extent of the delays remains to be seen, although Yucca's 
opponents in Nevada said it could prove to be the stake in the 
heart of the project, which is slated to hold some 154 million 
pounds of nuclear waste. 

The fate of Yucca Mountain has a direct bearing on a proposal 
by Private Fuel Storage, a consortium of electric utilities, to 
temporarily store waste on the Skull Valley Goshute Indian 
reservation 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. 

"Certainly, if Yucca Mountain is not going to go forward, 
then why would you ship fuel 2,000 miles across the country to 
the PFS facility?" asked Utah's Assistant Attorney General 
Denise Chancellor, who is leading the state's opposition to the 
Skull Valley site. "The whole premise of PFS is that it's a way 
station for Yucca and this seems to call that into doubt." 

Private Fuel Storage spokeswoman Sue Martin said the 
consortium hopes Yucca Mountain stays on schedule, and the 
sooner it is completed, the less time the Utah storage will be 
necessary. 

"Delays in Yucca Mountain could mean that there is even more 
of a need for interim storage such as our facility would 
provide," she said. "We have always said that our spent fuel 
from PFS will go to Yucca Mountain or whatever repository the 
federal government opens, because that is their ultimate 
responsibility and we feel confident that they will come up with 
something." 

PFS is seeking a 20-year license from the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, with an option for a 20-year extension. 

Bob Loux, director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects, 
the state's office opposing Yucca Mountain, said at the very 
least the Energy Department's investigation will make it 
impossible for the Energy Department to petition for a license 
for Yucca Mountain in the near future, as had been planned. He 
added it could upend the whole project. 

The documents in question dealt with water infiltration into 
the proposed site, which is central to objections Nevada has 
been raising. The state has said the site is too porous to 
contain the nuclear waste indefinitely and groundwater could 
corrode the waste casks. 

"The fact remains that this country needs a permanent 
geological nuclear waste repository and the administration will 
continue to aggressively pursue that goal," Bodman said. "We are 
committed to the safety and protection of the citizens of Nevada 
as we pursue the development of the Yucca Mountain project." 

Yucca has already suffered a series of setbacks that have 
pushed back its earliest opening date until 2012, and Reid says 
he believes it will never open. 

He has proposed a plan to have the government take control 
of the waste and store it in casks at the reactor sites. 

On Monday, Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. met with Bodman and 
urged the department to explore a similar option. 

ÂŠ Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. 
*****************************************************************
 49 Yucca: Gibbons Statement on Alleged Falsification of Yucca Documents
	
  Gibbons, Lawmaker and Geologist, Says All Scientific Studies 
must be Questioned and Re-evaluated 

3/16/2005

WASHINGTON D.C. -- Washington, DC  An ardent opponent to the
Yucca Mountain project and the sole geologist in Congress,
Congressman Jim Gibbons (R-Nev.) today released the following
statement regarding the reported allegations of improprieties in
scientific studies done at the proposed Yucca Mountain Nuclear
Waste Repository. 

Unfortunately, I am not surprised to learn that reports
regarding the safety of Yucca Mountain may have been falsified
or fabricated. For over two decades, the Department of Energy
has rushed headlong towards licensing the Yucca Mountain Project
no matter what. Todays allegations are extremely serious and
should halt the licensing process in its tracks. All of the
scientific studies and documentation related to Yucca Mountain
now must be questioned and re-evaluated. The DOE must be held
responsible for any impropriety and all work on the Yucca
Mountain project should be stopped until an investigation is
completed. I do not know how any Nevadan or any American can
have confidence in the DOE in its pursuit to license Yucca
Mountain in light of these recent allegations of false
documentation and their history of changing the rules and
standards without any regard for safety or security. The
transportation and storage of high level nuclear waste at Yucca
Mountain has been and always will be an unsafe and unsuitable
proposal that I will continue to fight. 

For more information, contact:
Amy Spanbauer
Press Secretary
Congressman Jim Gibbons
Phone: 202-225-6155
FAX: 202-225-5679
URL: http://wwwc.house.gov/gibbons/press_contact.asp

 	Congressman Jim Gibbons ˇ 100 Cannon House Office Building ˇ
Washington D.C. 20515
 	Voice: 202-225-6155 ˇ Fax: 202-225-5679 	 
*****************************************************************
 50 San Antonio Current: Radioactive waste, trash talk, and facts on file

news - 03/17/2005 - 

Radioactive waste not: Nebraska, Ohio, bring us your glowing
garbage! While Waste Control Specialists, the only company to
hold a Texas license for disposing of low-level radioactive
waste, courts new and myriad sources of the bad stuff for its
Andrews County dump, State Representative Mike Villarreal is
sponsoring HB 1656, which would study the possibility of
limiting the waste sources. The original Texas Low-Level
Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact restricts waste sources to
Vermont and the U.S. Department of Energy. Waste Control
Specialists would like to accept waste from anywhere, including
highly radioactive uranium by-product from Ohio. Alas, the
report won't be complete until January 2007. By then, the glow
on the West Texas horizon could be more than just the sunset. 

Trash talk: If you're tired of seeing trash along the San
Antonio River [See "No Dick's need apply" in this issue of the
Current], first, don't litter; then, volunteer for the annual
Basura Bash on Saturday, March 19. Volunteers should meet at 8
a.m. VFW Boulevard and Padre Drive. Cleanup begins at 9 a.m. 

Radio wars: RadioAid.com, an Austin-based, web-based streaming
radio station, announced last week it has settled its lawsuit
with Clear Channel regarding the domain name
http://clearchannelsucks.net. Clear Channel owns the rights to
clearchannelsucks.com. Last July, the National Arbitration Forum
stripped RadioAid of its ownership and gave
clearchannelsucks.net to Clear Channel. RadioAid sued in federal
court; as a part of the settlement, RadioAid retains ownership
of clearchannelsucks.net and won't accept commercial
sponsorships on the complaint site. 

Facts on file: What is the monetary unit in Moldova? What
mountain range separates Europe and Asia? 

If you're a product of standardized testing, the WorldQuest
International Trivia Competition should be a breeze. Sponsored
by the World Affairs Council, the event is Tuesday, March 22 at
6 p.m. at the Mission Room of the Convention Center, Market and
Alamo streets. Go to wacofsa.org/worldquest.htmlfor information
and an entry form. Proceeds benefit scholarship programs. 

By Lisa Sorg				 			

San Antonio Current 2005                                       

*****************************************************************
 51 ENSIGN: YUCCA SCIENCE ALLEGATIONS VINDICATE NEVADA'S CASE: 

03/16/2005
 				 				 
 Washington, D.C. â Senator John Ensign released the following
statement in reaction to allegations, made public today, that
employees with the U.S. Geological Survey had falsified
documents relating to the suitability of the proposed Yucca
Mountain nuclear waste repository: 

âWe in Nevada have said for years that the science at Yucca
Mountain is faulty â now it appears the science is fraudulent.
This latest development provides yet another reason to abandon
the misguided notion of storing high-level nuclear waste in
Nevada and will hopefully encourage an accelerated discussion of
alternatives that are safer and more scientifically sound. These
revelations will undoubtedly bolster Nevadaâs legal case
against Yucca Mountain. Senator Reid and I will remain vigilant
and weigh our options for further action, but today it is clear
the Yucca Mountain project continues to crumble before its
supportersâ eyes.â 

--Senator John Ensign 

				   		 	 

*****************************************************************
 52 Reid: Reid Statement on Falsification of Yucca Mountain Documentation
      
Wednesday, March 16, 2005 

WASHINGTON, D.C., -- The Department of Energy admitted today
that employees falsified documentation required to ensure the
accuracy and the credibility of the work at Yucca Mountain. 

Sen. Harry Reid released the following statement. 

âThis proves once again that DOE must cheat and lie in order
to make Yucca Mountain look safe. We arenât just talking about
false documentation on paper, this is about the health and
safety of Nevadans and the American people. It is abundantly
clear that there is no such thing as âsound scienceâ at
Yucca Mountain, and Iâm disappointed President Bush rushed so
quickly to push the project through and continues to make it a
priority. I do not believe Yucca Mountain will ever open, and
Nevada and our nation will be safer for our successful efforts
to stop the project. 

âIt should be obvious to everyone now that Yucca Mountain
isnât going anywhere. Sen. Ensign and I are working on
legislation that would allow waste to be stored on-site at
nuclear facilities. The tide is turning on Yucca Mountain, and
itâs time we look at this viable alternative and realistic
approach to long term waste storage.â 


### 

*****************************************************************
 53 AU ABC: Uranium inquiry to assess export prospects. 

17/03/2005. ABC News Online
 	
Demand and supply: Senator Brown says the inquiry is about
making more money. [File photo] (ABC TV)                 

 
The Australian Government says it wants to re-examine the global
supply and demand chain in the uranium industry. 
Australia exports almost a third of the world's uranium.

 Resources Minister Ian Mcfarlane says Australia has an abundant
supply of coal and gas, so it does not need to move towards
nuclear fuel. 
But countries like China have an insatiable appetite for uranium
that is expected to increase. 
Mr Mcfarlane says the inquiry is not a way to expand the number
of mines, although he does support further export.
 "I certainly plead guilty about doing everything I can to
increase the amount of uranium exports out of Australia," he
said. 

He says the review will also look at using uranium to reduce
global greenhouse gas emissions.

 But Greens Leader Bob Brown says the review is about making
money. 

"It's a push by the mining industry to open it up to unfettered
trade," he said.

 Both the Government and Opposition want the inquiry. 

*****************************************************************
 54 Yucca: Governor Guinn Expresses Outrage

  Cory Royer, Photojournalist
Nevada Officials Speak About Falsified Documents

Gov. Guinn said, "It's too bad we have to get this kind of news
through an e-mail, and that indicates that people have been
falsifying materials on very very important and delicate
scientific information that we really need to solidify this
project one way or another. And that's just not happening, and
it's a sad day for us in America when this happens." 
   

  Colleen McCarty, Reporter

Nevada Governor Guinn is speaking out about the news of
falsified documents and says he's disappointed and outraged by
this new development, but hardly surprised. 

The timing of this development is somewhat coincidental. On
Tuesday, a State Assembly committee passed a joint resolution
urging the federal government to recognize the unsuitability of
Yucca Mountain as a site for the storage nuclear waste. 

Governor Kenny Guinn has spent the bulk of his administration
fighting the project. In fact, in 1998 he and his staff
expressed concern about the water-related research at Yucca
Mountain. 

This latest revelation, of course, alleges the data involved in
the computer modeling for water infiltration at the site was
falsified. 

Governor Guinn and his staff have requested the actual emails in
question. He also says Nevada will have to wait for the results
of the DOE investigation before deciding how to proceed from
there. 

Governor Guinn told Eyewitness News, "It's too bad we have to
get this kind of news through an email, and that indicates that
people have been falsifying materials on very very important and
delicate scientific information that we really need to solidify
this project one way or another. And that's just not happening,
and it's a sad day for us in America when this happens." 

Members of Nevada's congressional delegation wasted no time
calling Wednesday's news a victory for Yucca Mountain opponents.
Senators Harry Reid and John Ensign both say the allegations are
devastating for the project. 

Sen. Harry Reid, (D) Nevada, said, "This has been a very bad
year for Yucca Mountain. And while it may not be the nail in the
coffin, it certainly is very bad. We have someone, or someones,
that have falsified documents to try to justify the licensing
process." 

Senator Reid adds that this news is the latest chapter in what
has been a very bad year for year for Yucca Mountain. 

Sen. John Ensign, (R) Nevada, said, "What was revealed today by
the Department of Energy I believe greatly strengthens the court
case for the State of Nevada and one of the reasons we may be
able to permanently kill the Yucca Mountain Project." 

Senator John Ensign echoed Senator Reid's remarks saying word in
Washington is that the Yucca Mountain Project may have been
dealt its final blow. "What we're hearing back here in the halls
of Congress now are the proponents of Yucca Mountain are
starting to say they don't think Yucca Mountain will ever be
opened. I think this gives us more momentum to killing the Yucca
Mountain Project once and for all," said Ensign. 

Representative Jon Porter says the entire Nevada congressional
delegation will gather to discuss this latest development. And
that he will head up a congressional committee meeting on the
matter as well. 

Senator Ensign also says this news supports suspicions that the
Department of Energy has been deceitful in this matter.   

Copyright 2000 - 2005 WorldNow and KLAS. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 55 klastv.com: Nevada Leaders Call For The Attorney General to Intervene

Yucca Mountain Documents May Have Been Falsified   
  
March 17, 2005   

  Mark Zamora, Photojournalist
Mayor Goodman Responds to Yucca Controversy

Mayor Oscar Goodman didn't hold back when he spoke about
government scientists possibly falsifying data in order to get a
license to bring nuclear waste to Nevada. 

  Janine Gill, Reporter
 
Local and state leaders are buzzing over the news that
scientists may have falsified documents in order to get a
nuclear waste dump licensed in Nevada. 

They all hope this spells the end for Yucca Mountain. An
investigation has been launched by the Department of Energy.
Since the news broke, Eyewitness News has been talking to local
leaders. Thursday, Eyewitness News caught up with Las Vegas
Mayor Oscar Goodman. 

Oscar Goodman said, "They haven't been playing with a full deck
and I think now they're being exposed, they're caught with their
pants down." 

Mayor Oscar Goodman didn't hold back when he spoke about
government scientists possibly falsifying data in order to get a
license to bring nuclear waste to Nevada. At his weekly news
conference, Goodman even brought a book published by the U.S.
Atomic Energy Commission in the 1950s to emphasize his belief
that Nevadans have been lied to. 

"'If you're out during the fallout, you may be advised to bathe,
wash your hair, dust your clothes.' They were telling the
American public, and we in Nevada, that there wasn't anything
wrong to brush it off. Well, same thing with Yucca Mountain,
they haven't told the truth from day one," Mayor Goodman said. 

When President Bush campaigned in Las Vegas last year, he
repeatedly said the decision on whether to house nuclear waste
at Yucca Mountain would be based on sound science. Eyewitness
News called the White House to see what the President had to say
about it now. 

A spokesperson wouldn't address that comment directly, instead
he responded to the possible actions by scientists saying, "The
President believes such behavior is absolutely unacceptable. He
expects a full investigation." 

Oscar Goodman adds, "Oh I think they're always trying to brush
it off. Nobody is going to take responsibility. They say they're
going to investigate it, but to me, the fellow probably got
caught and now he acts like he's coming forward and being a good
citizen." 

Numerous emails from a scientist with the U.S. Geological Survey
were uncovered in which the scientist indicated he had
fabricated documentation. Local and state leaders feel this
could devastate the chances of Yucca Mountain becoming a
reality. 

Nevada's congressional delegation says they will be gathering
soon to discuss this latest development. Congressman Jon Porter
says he will also head up a committee on the matter. 

Senators Harry Reid and John Ensign are calling for Attorney
General Alberto Gonzales to intervene and protect records
associated with Yucca Mountain falsification allegations.   

  LuAnne Sorrell &Adrian Arambulo, Reporters
Yucca Mountain Documents May Have Been Falsified

Startling allegations were revealed Wednesday that government
officials may have lied about the science relating to the Yucca
Mountain Project. The disclosure could jeopardize the project's
ability to get a federal permit to operate the site. 
   
      All content Š Copyright 2000 - 2005 WorldNow and KLAS. All
*****************************************************************
 56 KVBC: DOE Admits Yucca Mt. Safety Information May Have Been Lied About
  
March 18, 2005   

It's being called a devastating blow to the Yucca Mountain
Project -- some of the government's scientific data may have
been faked. Workers on the proposed nuclear waste dump are under
investigation for lying about their research -- meaning the
"sound science" President Bush said he was following might be
wrong. News 3's Steve Crupi is digging deeper into this scandal. 

Many of Nevada 's top politicians are telling us they're not
surprised at all. They have been highly skeptical of the
Department of Energy from the very beginning of this project.
And now that the DOE is admitting that scientists may have lied
about key safety information, the future of the project is
looking shakier than ever. 

There is no bigger Yucca Mountain opponent than Las Vegas Mayor
Oscar Goodman, and when he got the word that some of the
environmental research may have been faked, he responded in
typical fashion. "If there's an employee who lied, that has to
be checked out. If he lied, that should be the end of Yucca
Mountain . Those responsible for the lies should all be locked
up in the stinkin' repository." 

The DOE has acknowledged that emails from an employee with the
U.S. Geological Survey dating back to 1998 talk about fabricated
results from water and climate studies at Yucca Mountain . This
scandal may not signal an end to Yucca Mountain , but DOE
officials say it will certainly delay the project even further. 
The Department of Energy has relied heavily on computer models
in its effort to show that Yucca Mountain could safely hold the
nation's nuclear waste. If those computer models are flawed or
worse yet, if they've been faked, the safety of the entire
project may be in question.   

      All content Š Copyright 2000 - 2005 WorldNow and KVBC. All
*****************************************************************
 57 KVBC: Yucca Mountain Proposal Documents Now Said To Be Falsified

March 18, 2005   

It's news that could kill the proposed nuclear dump at Yucca
Mountain. Documents used to prove the Yucca Mountain project is
safe are now said to be falsified. Even worse, we're just now
finding out about it, even though the documents are at least
five years old. News   3&#39;s Mitch Truswellreports it's not
just one worker involved. It's the emails sent back and forth
between two employees that started all of this. 

In those emails, about 20 of them, investigators believe there's
evidence employees falsified their work. The employees in
question were working on the Yucca Mountain project, but they
were from the US Geological Survey. According to the USGS, the
employee's work on water infiltration (that's how water flows
through Yucca Mountain and into the repository as well as
climate studies at Yucca) may have been falsified. 

USGS won't say exactly what was said in the emails. We know they
were from one employee to another, about 20 emails in all. To
strong opponents of the repository, this is the day they've been
waiting for. "I've been saying it's the beginning of the end for
a long time. This isn't the beginning of the end. That's already
happened. I think this is the end." 

Similar thoughts come from Congressman Jon Porter. It calls into
question the whole project. People all across the country made
decisions based on this information. With the investigation
ongoing as to exactly what Yucca Mountain studies were falsified
and how widespread it is, it's unclear what impact all this has
on Yucca's future, but not from Nevada's perspective. I think
this gives us more momentum to killing permanently the Yucca
Mountain project once and for all. 

"I don't know how they'll recover from this." That water
infiltration study is very important. The more water that is
shown to flow through the mountain could mean containers holding
radioactive waste could corrode and possibly leak sooner.
Today's disclosure follows a series of setbacks for Yucca
Mountain. In fact, the DOE has delayed filing its license
application and now says it won't open by its 2010 target. 

Last year, congress slashed the president's budget for the
facility, and a federal appeals court rejected the radiation
protection standards established by the EPA. 

Last month, the official in charge of the Yucca project
resigned, citing personal reasons.   

Copyright 2000 - 2005 WorldNow and KVBC. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 58 Whitehaven News: DON'T DUMP WASTE HERE 

COUNCILLORS from Cumbria, who are fighting a switch of nuclear 
waste from Dounreay to Drigg, are visiting the Scottish nuclear 
plant.

Members of Cumbria County Council have objected to the move, 
which is backed by the reprocessing plants regulators.

Because the Scots say their low-level nuclear dump is full they 
are seeking to ship the waste to Cumbria. 

The objectors from Cumbria are arguing that rubbish generated at 
the complex should stay where it is. 

Regulators have said there is no alternative to exporting the low 
grade material  estimated at a lorry-load per week  to the 
national waste depository at Drigg, near Sellafield. 

The move has been supported by green watchdogs, the Scottish 
Environmental Protection Agency. New dumps at Dounreay are not 
expected to be complete for another six years. 

But bosses have insisted they are confident they will eventually 
be able to deal with the 100,000 cubic metres of new radioactive 
rubbish caused by decommissioning the nuclear power plant. 

It is feared that moving waste may cause environmental problems 

One delegation member, Coun Tim Knowles, said: We feel that low 
level nuclear waste should stay where it is until policy issues 
have been resolved. The governments reviewing the low level 
waste issue, with a report coming out next year.

I think we tend to be seen as the central location to deal with 
all these problems. 

Weve got 60% of the UKs waste, therefore weve got the 
problems associated with that. 

*****************************************************************
 59 Interfax: Moscow knows nothing of Washington's plans to revise NPT

Mar 17 2005 8:09PM
 
MOSCOW. March 17 (Interfax) - Moscow has no information about
Washington's plans to revise the nuclear non-proliferation
treaty (NPT) but believes that the treaty's potential has not
been exhausted, the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement
posted on the ministry's website on Thursday. 

"We know nothing about changes in the United States' official
position in support of the NPT in its present form. On the
contrary, our permanent contacts with American officials
indicate Washington's intention to cooperate in strengthening
the treaty and in preparing and holding a regular conference on
its implementation in New York in May," the statement says.     

Š 1991-2004 Interfax
 All rights reserved
 
News and other data on this web site are provided for
information purposes only, and are not intended for
republication or redistribution. Republication or redistribution
*****************************************************************
 60 ABQjournal: UC Eyes Partners In Bid For Lab 

the Albuquerque Journal newspaper. 

Thursday, March 17, 2005 

Albuquerque Journal--> By Michelle Locke 
The Associated Press 

LOS ANGELES The University of California is close to 
putting together a team of partners for a potential bid to hold 
on as managers of the Los Alamos nuclear lab. 

Finding a partner would be a significant step in UC's bid 
preparations and comes at a time when a number of potential 
rivals have announced they won't pursue the contract. 

"They're dropping by the wayside, and part of it is because 
they can't come up with a suitable academic partner," UC Vice 
President Robert Foley said as he briefed the system's governing 
Board of Regents on the competition status Wednesday. "Nobody 
does science and technology like the University of California." 

UC regents haven't voted on whether to bid for the Los 
Alamos job, but they have told staff to prepare as though they 
will bid. 

However, Foley told regents there are potential obstacles 
to a UC bid, especially recent changes to the government's draft 
specifications that would require UC to form a special 
corporation to manage the lab and create a stand-alone pension 
system. 

Los Alamos employees, who currently are covered under UC's 
systemwide plan, are not happy about the pension proposal, and 
regents chairman Gerald Parsky said that issue will have to be 
resolved to UC's satisfaction. 

"The employees at Los Alamos are extremely important to 
us," Parsky said. "We are going to be paying very close 
attention to making sure that their retirement, their benefits 
will be protected in this or we won't bid." 

The government's final specifications may be released in 
early April; the bidding deadline will be 90 days after the 
release, and regents may be voting on whether to bid in late 
spring. 

UC has run the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico 
since it was formed during World War II to work on the atomic 
bomb. The university has also managed a second weapons lab, the 
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Northern California, 
since it was established in 1952. 

For decades, the government extended UC's contract as 
manager without competitive bids. But after a series of 
embarrassing management lapses at Los Alamos, the Department of 
Energy announced it would seek bids when the management contract 
expired this September. 

Livermore's contract also expires this fall and is headed 
for the bid process, but the government has indicated it will 
extend that contract for two years. 

UC regents voted in January to submit a bid for its third 
national lab, the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. 
Lawrence Berkeley conducts unclassified research and has been 
part of the UC system since the 1930s. 

Foley said he expects a decision on the Lawrence Berkeley 
contract soon. He said the government won't say whether there 
are other competitors. 

In the Los Alamos competition, Foley said it's likely there 
will be at least one bidder, probably a consortium of academic 
and industrial partners. 

Copyright Albuquerque Journal 

Steve@abqjournal.com 
*****************************************************************
 61 Tri-City Herald: Energy Northwest mum on evaluation 

This story was published Thursday, March 17th, 2005 

By Chris Mulick, Herald Olympia bureau 

OLYMPIA -- Energy Northwest's performance in an industry group's
evaluation of nuclear plant operations is slipping. 

The public power consortium won't talk about the details of its
most recent evaluation by the Institute of Nuclear Power
Operations or even give its score, citing an INPO policy that
its members not talk about its reviews as a condition of
membership. 

But the utility said the INPO described Energy Northwest
performance as "generally in keeping with the high standards
required in nuclear power" but that "a few significant
weaknesses may exist." 

That's language that historically correlated with a score of 3
on the INPO's score range of 1 to 5, with 1 being the highest.
Energy Northwest received a 1 in 2000. That score was downgraded
to a 2 in Energy Northwest's last evaluation. 

In an interview, Energy Northwest spokesman Brad Peck said that
rating recently was degraded further after a team of evaluators
visited in January. 

"Our company leadership was disappointed by the INPO numerical
rating, but they are quick to acknowledge that the assessment
was fair and comprehensive," he said in a prepared statement. 

Peck said the INPO didn't have concerns about the 1,157-megawatt
Columbia Generating Station's safety systems but raised
questions about reliability. 

"INPO gave us a solid evaluation, and we've already begun
tackling the areas they identified as needing some work," Vic
Parrish, Energy Northwest's chief executive, said in a prepared
statement. 

Though the evaluation's review period included the end of the
plant's longest-ever continuous run, it also included lengthy
delays in coming out of what turned into a near four-week-long
unplanned outage last summer. 

Energy Northwest won't provide more details about the INPO
report because it is considered "a proprietary document we don't
own," Peck said. 

"We being public power, it gets kind of gray, I admit," he said. 

Energy Northwest paid $731,884 in annual dues to the INPO in
December and also must provide a loaned employee or executive
each year. 

Peck said Energy Northwest's long-term performance suggests the
Columbia Generating Station is reliable and points to Nuclear
Regulatory Commission ratings that remain strong. 

Š 2005 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
 62 Daily Californian: Regents Reaffirm Support For Lab - 

By TRACI KAWAGUCHI
Contributing Writer
Thursday, March 17, 2005

LOS ANGELESThe UC Board of Regents reaffirmed its confidence in 
the importance of the Los Alamos National Laboratorys 
contributions yesterday. They advised, however, that UC should 
fight some of the conditions outlined by the federal government. 

        The draft request for proposal, which was revised by the 
National Nuclear Security Administration last month, includes 
conditions that would cause considerable distress to UC and the 
labs employees, said Vice President for Laboratory Management 
Robert Foley. 

        He said the revised draft, which calls for a special 
purpose cooperation to carry out the contract and a stand-alone 
pension plan for employees, raises questions over whether the 
universitys retirement plans and employee benefits will carry 
over if UC retains its hold on the lab. 

        That game is not over yet, but it has the potential for 
causing some considerable distress, Foley said. 

        The regents said they will wait for the final request for 
proposal, which could be released as early as April, before 
making a final decision on whether to bid. 

        We are going to be paying very close attention to making 
sure that their retirement, their benefits will be protected in 
this or we wont bid, Regents Chairman Gerald Parsky said. We 
want to give assurance to them that as part of the UC family we 
are very cognizant of their concerns. 

        Despite some regents concerns over the proposed 
conditions to run the lab, they stressed the importance of the 
labs contributions to both the university and the nation. 

        Regent Norman Pattiz said he had taken a take a wait and 
see attitude at one time, but after a recent trip to the lab, 
many of his questions were answered. 

        Its ... very clear to me that the wide variety of work 
being done here is crucial, essential and beyond the scope of 
just whats important for the university but important for the 
nation, Pattiz said. 

        Although recent security lapses have raised concerns over 
UCs ability to manage the lab, Parsky said the lab and the 
university have come up with a mutual commitment to avert such 
mishaps in the future. 

        UC is currently in talks with private corporations to 
team up to run the lab, Foley said, which could boost UCs 
chances to keep the lab. 

        We feel comfortable that errors that were committed in 
the past have been corrected, Parsky said. These mistakes will 
not occur again, Parsky said. 

        Foley pointed to the string of competitors falling by 
the wayside as an indication that UC still has a chance to hold 
onto the lab. 

        Part of it is because they cant come up with a suitable 
academic partner. (If) you start looking at academic potentials 
out there you would have a tough time of coming up with an 
equivalent, Foley said. Nobody does science and technology like 
the University of California. 

Contact Traci Kawaguchi at tkawaguchi@dailycal.org.

 (c) 2005 Berkeley, California dailycal@dailycal.org  

*****************************************************************
 63 lamonitor.com: Regents briefed on LANL contract 

The Online News Source for Los Alamos
 
ROGER SNODGRASS, , Monitor Assistant Editor

The University of California Board of Regents sounded eager to 
let the competition begin. 

Regent Norman J. Pattiz, chairman of the board of Westwood One, 
said he had taken a wait-and-see attitude about whether the 
university should pursue the management contract at Los Alamos 
National Laboratory, but had been particularly impressed after a 
recent visit.

"It's one of the most interesting and stimulating visits I've 
ever made to anyplace," he told the regents at their meeting in 
Los Angeles Wednesday, "There's some great work being done 
there." 

A final decision about whether to compete for the task of
managing the laboratory is expected to be made by the regents
only after a final RFP has been delivered from the National
Nuclear Security Administration, although the regents have
authorized preparations necessary for making a proposal as a
prime contractor for the laboratory.

Pattiz' comments arose during an open session of the committee
on oversight of the Department of Energy laboratories, featuring
a presentation by Vice President Bob Foley. 

Foley described the evolution of the draft requests for proposal
that have been submitted for comment by the procurement board,
highlighting two issues of concern.

One was that NNSA might require a prime contractor to make a
special purpose corporation (a limited liability corporation)
for the contract. The other was that NNSA was currently calling
for a site-specific pension plan, splitting LANL's pension from
its manager's corporate or institutional program. 

The issues were under discussion, he noted. New Mexico's two
Senator's were involved and had asked the Secretary of Energy
Samuel Bodman to get directly involved.

"This has potential for causing distress," Foley said. "It has
upset employees and the elected representatives."

Regent Sherry Lansing, former chair and CEO of Paramount Motion
Picture Group, asked about progress in finding an industrial
partner.

"My understanding is that it's rather hard," she said.

Foley said, as he had said at the last regents meeting in
January, that there had been serious talks with potential
partners.

"I believe we are well on the way to final teaming
arrangements," he said.

Regent David Lee, a businessman and engineer, asked about
potential competitors in the running for LANL.

Foley said competitors have been "dropping by the wayside," a
trend he ascribed to their difficulties with coming up with a
suitable academic partner.

But, he said, "We believe there will probably be at least one
other consortium."

Foley said he expected a final RFP by early April with proposals
due in July and a contract awarded in October. He thought the
contract would be extended to April 2006, in order to
accommodate a six-month transition.

Under NNSA's current plan, employees would have a six-month
period to decide whether to retire, go inactive, or transfer
with credit to a new pension program, he said.

Audio of the Board of Regents meeting was webcast.   

  Š 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.   
*****************************************************************
 64 lamonitor.com: Nanos to testify 

The Online News Source for Los Alamos
 

ROGER SNODGRASS, , Monitor Assistant Editor

Los Alamos National Laboratory Director Peter Nanos will be
among the witnesses before a subcommittee of the House Energy
and Commerce Committee, which is meeting Friday morning in
Washington, D.C. 
The Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, chaired by Rep.
Ed Whitfield, R-Ky., is reviewing security initiatives at DOE
nuclear facilities.

National Nuclear Security Administration Administrator Linton
Brooks and Glenn Podonsky, Department of Energy director of
security and safety performance assurance are scheduled to
testify as well. 


Following Nanos, Danielle Brian, Executive Director on Nuclear
Security, The Project on Government Oversight, a Washington,
D.C. public interest organization, will submit testimony.

Last Friday, the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce
Committee, Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, and Whitfield sent a letter
to Brooks, asking for more information about the "cost and
reasonableness" of the suspension of operations at LANL that
began in July last year. 
The letter recounted the representatives' efforts to obtain
follow-up information on the stand down, which began as a result
of irregularities in accounting for classified information,
followed by a serious laser injury involving a student working
at the lab.

Nanos originally estimated the cost of the suspension at $100
million, but the letter to Brooks cited a report, dated Feb. 22,
from the NNSA's field office in Albuquerque, which raised the
estimate to $370 million. 
"The amount is staggering, and we are concerned that it will
continue to grow," wrote the two chairmen.

"However, the necessity for the stand down and its duration is
the direct result of recurring mismanagement by the University
of California (UC), and we believe UC should pay for a portion
of the cost of the stand down," they added.

Chris Harrington, a spokesman for the University of California,
said, "We've been asked to come before the committee and we'll
provide the answers to the questions asked."

Harrington said safety and security were very important to the
committee and to UC and LANL.

"We've taken very aggressive actions to improve safety and
security throughout the laboratory," he said.

"And this is a chance for us to review those actions and efforts
with the committee.

Beth Daley of POGO said in a telephone call this morning that
Daniel would talk about the relationship between the
laboratory's treatment of whistleblowers and congressional
oversight.

"From our sources, the costs are up to a billion dollars," she
said.

The investigations subcommittee was the arena in which LANL's
property and financial management problems were aired two years
ago.   

  Š 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.   
*****************************************************************
 65 lamonitor.com: Emergency Management Office stresses education 

The Online News Source for Los Alamos
 
CAROL A. CLARK, , Monitor Staff Writer

Editor's Note: This is part two of a three-part public education
series about emergency response programs in place at the Los
Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos County and American Red
Cross. 
The Los Alamos County Office of Emergency Management (OEM) helps
enhance public safety by assisting other county departments with
disaster preparedness, mitigation, response and recovery.

Los Alamos County Emergency Management Coordinator Philmont
Taylor and Emergency Management Aide Dharmatma Khalsa also head
up the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC). 

"The LEPC is not a decision-making body but more of an
informational clearing house," Taylor said during last week's
monthly meeting held at Mesa Public Library.

The committee is comprised of representatives from LANL
Communications &Outreach, LANL Center for Homeland Security, Los
Alamos Medical Center, Red Cross Disaster Services, Los Alamos
Fire Department, Los Alamos County Fleet, Utilities, and
Community Services, Bandelier, Los Alamos Public Schools,
Maternal &Child Health, Chamber of Commerce, Honeywell FM,
Bechtel Nevada, Los Alamos Amateur Radio Club, Search and
Rescue, New Mexico Department of Health and other community
organizations interested in emergency planning for the
community. 
Current OEM projects include revision of an all-hazards
emergency operations plan; expanding means of alerting the
community in the event of a disaster, educating the public on
emergency preparedness, and using federal homeland security and
emergency planning funds to improve the county's overall
disaster and terrorism preparedness.

Through a domestic disaster preparedness grant, the OEM has
secured the services of URS Corp. to help revise the all-hazards
emergency operations plan in compliance with federal and state
regulations. 
URS Corp. assisted the county in developing the post Cerro
Grande mitigation effort in the aftermath of the 2000 fire,
Taylor said.

URS Environmental Scientist Lora Sedore gave a presentation to
LEPC board members last week.

"We've just moved our offices from White Rock to our new office
in the Bradbury Museum in Los Alamos," Sedore said.

Sedore and her URS colleague Will Gleason overviewed the
emergency operations plan.

The plan will be in accord with the National Response Plan (NRP)
and be National Incident Management System (NIMS) compliant.

Sedore outlined the structure of the plan explaining it will
comprise a basic plan and a resource handbook.

The basic plan represents the public part of the plan and must
be adopted by county council.

The resource handbook is not required to be adopted or reviewed
by the public for security reasons, etc.

The plan also will be compliant with the state-mandated
"cross-walk".

Khalsa explained the crosswalk ensures that certain key
functions and staff responsibilities are covered in the plan.

URS has developed similar emergency operations plans for six
counties in the New Mexico that are currently undergoing the
state review process, Sedore said.

"A jurisdiction can be liable if something bad happens and there
is no plan in place," Khalsa said.

The county's plan will describe how the county will handle
emergency situations and disasters within the county's
jurisdiction.

The plan will contain national response and national incident
management procedures, Taylor said.

"We will be able to talk seamlessly - no buzz words, we will use
plain language so federal, state, and local agencies are all on
the same sheet of music," he said.

Sedore estimated completion of the county's emergency operations
plan for this summer.

Taylor spoke about the importance of a well educated community
in terms of emergency management issues.

"The better educated a community - the easier it is for first
responders to mobilize the public in the event of an emergency,"
he said. "One of the best ways for obtaining information is to
surf our website - www.lac-nm.us.

The site has links and resources to many emergency preparedness
pages from preparing a home disaster kit to what to do in a
lightning storm."

Taylor cited next month's "Wildfire 2005" as another opportunity
to gather vital emergency information. "We'll have
representatives from the national park service, the forest
service, Los Alamos National Laboratory and others - they'll put
on a good presentation with handouts to help people be aware of
the threats in our community."

Taylor said he was glad to move to Los Alamos to begin working
as the emergency management coordinator just after the fire.

"Because the community had just been through the major upheaval
from the fire, you don't have to preach the perils of wildfire,"
Taylor said. "They've been through it, they're smarter. Go to a
community with no disaster and a tornado comes through and
they're in a state of shock. The people in this community have a
heightened sense of awareness and that really makes it easier
for first responders."

It is very important to become educated in the community in
which you live, Taylor said.

"People who live in Los Alamos know not to go down into a canyon
in the middle of a torrential rain, to take defensible space
measures around their houses, and not to grow a ton of junipers
next to their houses," he said.

People in Los Alamos know this thing (the fire) really did
happen Taylor said, it's a fact - people lived through it - they
survived it and that's why they have an awareness of the danger.
He calls it the higher emergency preparedness IQ.

"Wildfire is the greatest natural hazard that we face in Los
Alamos and the most likely natural hazard to occur here," he
said. "The defensible space program was a great mitigation
effort - it got people's attention."

Taylor cannot emphasize enough the importance of community
members taking responsibility for emergency preparedness.

"We are doing everything possible to prepare - can the public do
any less? - help us out, prepare yourselves and your families,"
he said. "If you had to evacuate right now-in this minute - are
you ready?" Taylor asked.

"How long would it take to get the kids ready and get out?"   

  Š 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.   

  
*****************************************************************
 66 Las Vegas RJ: Base opens new center for remote-piloted craft 
 
Thursday, March 17, 2005
 

By KEITH ROGERS
REVIEW-JOURNAL
 

Nellis Air Force Base on Wednesday opened the Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle Center for Excellence, which will streamline how
Predators and other remotely piloted spy planes are used in
fighting terrorism.
 
 The center at the Indian Springs Auxiliary Air Field could
bring a type of Star Wars weaponry down to Earth, said Maj. Gen.
Stephen Goldfein, commander of the Air Warfare Center.
 
 "I would say the music sheet is sort of open to be written on,"
Goldfein said when asked about using remotely piloted aircraft
as platforms for microwave-directed energy weapons.
 
 Microwave energy generated by a radar transmitter could be used
to fry electronic gear or zap humans into unconsciousness
without inflicting permanent brain damage.
 
 But Goldfein said the near-term goal of the center is to
demonstrate the most effective ways of deploying remotely
piloted aircraft. The list includes Predators equipped with
laser-guided Hellfire missiles, the Global Hawk and miniature
Raven spy planes. 
Goldfein said opening the center at the Indian Springs Auxiliary
Air Field, 45 miles northwest of Las Vegas, was a logical step
because of expansions under way for the nation's high-demand
Predator squadrons at the airfield, a new battle laboratory and
the airfield's nearness to the Nellis range, where weapon
systems can be tested.
 
 "It seemed to make eminent sense to bring all the experts here
and press on," he said in a conference call. "Obviously, we have
a lot of work to do to put it together in detail."
 
 With much of center's facilities in place or planned for
construction to bolster the Predator training program, the
remaining costs might include adding more personnel and
resources, Goldfein said.
 
 The center could be extended to other service branches such as
the Army and Marines, which also operate unmanned aerial
vehicles.
 
 "From my perch, there's hardly anything we do at Nellis and at
this great training range that is not joint," he said. "I think
it would be immensely exciting to have other services join in
with us."
 
 
Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************